Rule 12 - Defenses and Objections: When and How Presented; Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings; Consolidating Motions; Waiving Defenses; Pretrial Hearing

1,000+ Citing briefs

  1. Andrews et al v. Fremantlemedia N.A., Inc. et al

    MEMORANDUM OF LAW in Support re: 68 MOTION for Reargument re: 65 Order on Motion for Conference, Order on Motion for Leave to File Document,,,,,,, 43 Scheduling Order,, PURSUANT TO LOCAL RULE 6.3. . Document

    Filed May 6, 2014

    (citations omitted). 26 Defendants’ legal argument [Docket No. 62, p. 1] that Plaintiffs somehow forfeited their claims for not addressing Counts XVIII-XI in their main opposition brief [Docket No. 55] is based on a gross mischaracterization of two legal authorities. See Raniola v. Bratton, 243 F.3d 610, 613 n.1 (2d Cir. 2001) (addressing whether party waived claim by failing to address at trial); Felske v. Hirschmann, 2012 WL 716632, at *3 (S.D.N.Y. Mar. 1, 2012) (addressing waiver on failing to raise objections to personal jurisdiction, which is waived by operation of statute). Rule 12(b)(6) represents the Defendants’ motion to the Court for relief – it is therefore Defendants’ burden alone to show why the factual allegations appearing on the face of the complaint, even if taken as true, are insufficient to state a cause of action. 27 “Filing at the trial court level with a view to ‘making a record’ is crucial because, absent extraordinary circumstances, federal appellate courts will not consider rulings or evidence which are not part of the trial record.” IBM v. Edelstein, 526 F.2d 37, 45 (2d Cir.1975) “Moreover, it is of no avail to an appellant that the trial court itself may have prevented him from including a particular item in the trial record; the appellate court will not speculate about the proceedings below, but will rely only upon the record actually made.” Schoenberg, 971 F.2d at 936 Case 1:13-cv-05174-NRB Document 69 Filed 05/06/14 Page 33 of 33

  2. Mariter Roldan et al v. Fresenius Medical Care North America Limited Partnership et al

    NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION to Dismiss Case for Failure to State a Claim Upon Which Relief Can Be Granted

    Filed June 19, 2017

    Care North America Limited Partnership, Bio-Medical Applications of California, Inc. (“Bio-Medical Applications”), Renal Advantage Inc. (“Renal Advantage”), Fresenius Medical Care – Eucalyptus, LLC (“Eucalyptus”), and Fresenius Medical Care Goldenwest, LLC’s (“Goldenwest”) (all collectively, “Defendants”) Motion to Dismiss The Complaint For Failure To State A Claim Upon Which Relief Can Be Granted (FRCP 12(b)(6)), Or, In The Alternative, To Dismiss Or Stay This Action Under The Colorado River Doctrine (FRCP 12(b)(1)) (the “Motion”), the papers filed in support and opposition, having heard the arguments of counsel, and good cause appearing therefore, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT the Defendants’ Motion is granted; IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT the Complaint is dismissed in its entirety because it fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. In the alternative, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT this action is dismissed [or stayed] under the Colorado River doctrine pursuant to Rule 12(b)(1) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. IT IS SO ORDERED.

  3. Cirrus Education Inc. et al v. Christopher M. Adams et al

    NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION to Dismiss Case DEFENDANTS NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION:

    Filed January 9, 2017

    R. CIV. P. 12(b)(6); (5) TO DISMISS PLAINTIFFS’ FIFTH CAUSE OF ACTION UNDER FED. R. CIV. P. 12(b)(1); AND (6) TO DISMISS PLAINTIFFS’ SIXTH CAUSE OF ACTION UNDER FED. R. CIV. P. 12(b)(6) as follows: Michael C. Tu, Esq. Counsel for Plaintiffs Kevin M. Askew, Esq.

  4. Robert Neidl v. Top Rank, Inc., et Al.,

    NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION to Dismiss Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12

    Filed September 7, 2016

    te 3100 Chicago, Illinois 60601 Telephone: (312) 456-8421 Facsimile: (312) 456-8435 Attorneys for Defendants Floyd Mayweather and Mayweather Promotions LLC UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA - WESTERN DIVISION IN RE: PACQUIAO-MAYWEATHER BOXING MATCH PAY-PER-VIEW LITIGATION This document relates to: ALL CASES MDL No. 2:15-ml-02639-RGK (PLAx) [MDL No. 2639] [PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING MAYWEATHER DEFENDANTS’ 12(B)(6) MOTION TO DISMISS [Filed concurrently with Notice of Motion; Memorandum of Points and Authorities; and Declaration of Ruth A. Bahe-Jachna] Courtroom: 850 Judge: Hon. R. Gary Klausner Hearing Date: None scheduled Hearing Time: None scheduled Case 2:15-cv-06230-RGK-PLA Document 55-6 Filed 09/07/16 Page 1 of 12 Page ID #:611 1 MAYWEATHER DEFENDANTS’ [PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING 12(B)(6) MOTION TO DISMISS 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 ORDER Before the Court is the Federal Rule of Civil Procedure Rule 12(B)(6) Motion to Dismiss (1) Mahoney v. Pacquiao, et al. [California]; (2) Alessi v. Top Rank, Inc., et al. [Connecticut]; (3) Brady v. Emmanuel Pacquiao, et al. [Florida]; (4) Gomez, et al. v. Top Rank, Inc., et al. [Illinois]; (5) Bradley v. Emmanuel Pacquiao, et al. [Michigan]; (6) Neidl v. Top Rank, Inc., et al. [Nevada]; (7) Bobadilla v. Top Rank, Inc., et al. [New Jersey]; (8) Barrios, et al. v. Emmanuel Pacquiao, et al. [New York]; (9) Gordon, et al. v. Showtime Networks, Inc., et al. [Pennsylvania]; (10) Rodriguez, et al. v. Emmanuel Pacquiao, et al. [Puerto Rico]; (11) Thrailkill v. Top Rank, Inc., et al. [South Carolina]; (12) Crabtree v. Pacquiao, et al. [Tennessee]; (13) Craig, et al. v. Emmanuel Pacquiao, et al. [Texas]; (14) Jammers, Inc. v. Top Rank, Inc., et al. [Commercial Plaintiffs]; and (15) DeHart, et al. v. Top Rank, Inc., et al. [Live Attendees] (collectively “Plaintiffs’ Complaints”) brought by Defendants Floyd Mayweather and Mayweather Promotions LLC (

  5. Felix Natal v. Top Rank, Inc. et al

    NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION to Dismiss Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12

    Filed September 7, 2016

    te 3100 Chicago, Illinois 60601 Telephone: (312) 456-8421 Facsimile: (312) 456-8435 Attorneys for Defendants Floyd Mayweather and Mayweather Promotions LLC UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA - WESTERN DIVISION IN RE: PACQUIAO-MAYWEATHER BOXING MATCH PAY-PER-VIEW LITIGATION This document relates to: ALL CASES MDL No. 2:15-ml-02639-RGK (PLAx) [MDL No. 2639] [PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING MAYWEATHER DEFENDANTS’ 12(B)(6) MOTION TO DISMISS [Filed concurrently with Notice of Motion; Memorandum of Points and Authorities; and Declaration of Ruth A. Bahe-Jachna] Courtroom: 850 Judge: Hon. R. Gary Klausner Hearing Date: None scheduled Hearing Time: None scheduled Case 2:15-cv-06573-RGK-PLA Document 52-6 Filed 09/07/16 Page 1 of 12 Page ID #:534 1 MAYWEATHER DEFENDANTS’ [PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING 12(B)(6) MOTION TO DISMISS 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 ORDER Before the Court is the Federal Rule of Civil Procedure Rule 12(B)(6) Motion to Dismiss (1) Mahoney v. Pacquiao, et al. [California]; (2) Alessi v. Top Rank, Inc., et al. [Connecticut]; (3) Brady v. Emmanuel Pacquiao, et al. [Florida]; (4) Gomez, et al. v. Top Rank, Inc., et al. [Illinois]; (5) Bradley v. Emmanuel Pacquiao, et al. [Michigan]; (6) Neidl v. Top Rank, Inc., et al. [Nevada]; (7) Bobadilla v. Top Rank, Inc., et al. [New Jersey]; (8) Barrios, et al. v. Emmanuel Pacquiao, et al. [New York]; (9) Gordon, et al. v. Showtime Networks, Inc., et al. [Pennsylvania]; (10) Rodriguez, et al. v. Emmanuel Pacquiao, et al. [Puerto Rico]; (11) Thrailkill v. Top Rank, Inc., et al. [South Carolina]; (12) Crabtree v. Pacquiao, et al. [Tennessee]; (13) Craig, et al. v. Emmanuel Pacquiao, et al. [Texas]; (14) Jammers, Inc. v. Top Rank, Inc., et al. [Commercial Plaintiffs]; and (15) DeHart, et al. v. Top Rank, Inc., et al. [Live Attendees] (collectively “Plaintiffs’ Complaints”) brought by Defendants Floyd Mayweather and Mayweather Promotions LLC (

  6. Victor Capo v. Top Rank, Inc. et al

    NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION to Dismiss Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12

    Filed September 7, 2016

    te 3100 Chicago, Illinois 60601 Telephone: (312) 456-8421 Facsimile: (312) 456-8435 Attorneys for Defendants Floyd Mayweather and Mayweather Promotions LLC UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA - WESTERN DIVISION IN RE: PACQUIAO-MAYWEATHER BOXING MATCH PAY-PER-VIEW LITIGATION This document relates to: ALL CASES MDL No. 2:15-ml-02639-RGK (PLAx) [MDL No. 2639] [PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING MAYWEATHER DEFENDANTS’ 12(B)(6) MOTION TO DISMISS [Filed concurrently with Notice of Motion; Memorandum of Points and Authorities; and Declaration of Ruth A. Bahe-Jachna] Courtroom: 850 Judge: Hon. R. Gary Klausner Hearing Date: None scheduled Hearing Time: None scheduled Case 2:15-cv-06664-RGK-PLA Document 34-6 Filed 09/07/16 Page 1 of 12 Page ID #:521 1 MAYWEATHER DEFENDANTS’ [PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING 12(B)(6) MOTION TO DISMISS 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 ORDER Before the Court is the Federal Rule of Civil Procedure Rule 12(B)(6) Motion to Dismiss (1) Mahoney v. Pacquiao, et al. [California]; (2) Alessi v. Top Rank, Inc., et al. [Connecticut]; (3) Brady v. Emmanuel Pacquiao, et al. [Florida]; (4) Gomez, et al. v. Top Rank, Inc., et al. [Illinois]; (5) Bradley v. Emmanuel Pacquiao, et al. [Michigan]; (6) Neidl v. Top Rank, Inc., et al. [Nevada]; (7) Bobadilla v. Top Rank, Inc., et al. [New Jersey]; (8) Barrios, et al. v. Emmanuel Pacquiao, et al. [New York]; (9) Gordon, et al. v. Showtime Networks, Inc., et al. [Pennsylvania]; (10) Rodriguez, et al. v. Emmanuel Pacquiao, et al. [Puerto Rico]; (11) Thrailkill v. Top Rank, Inc., et al. [South Carolina]; (12) Crabtree v. Pacquiao, et al. [Tennessee]; (13) Craig, et al. v. Emmanuel Pacquiao, et al. [Texas]; (14) Jammers, Inc. v. Top Rank, Inc., et al. [Commercial Plaintiffs]; and (15) DeHart, et al. v. Top Rank, Inc., et al. [Live Attendees] (collectively “Plaintiffs’ Complaints”) brought by Defendants Floyd Mayweather and Mayweather Promotions LLC (

  7. Chamar Bynum v. Emmanuel Pacquiao et al

    NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION to Dismiss Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12

    Filed September 7, 2016

    te 3100 Chicago, Illinois 60601 Telephone: (312) 456-8421 Facsimile: (312) 456-8435 Attorneys for Defendants Floyd Mayweather and Mayweather Promotions LLC UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA - WESTERN DIVISION IN RE: PACQUIAO-MAYWEATHER BOXING MATCH PAY-PER-VIEW LITIGATION This document relates to: ALL CASES MDL No. 2:15-ml-02639-RGK (PLAx) [MDL No. 2639] [PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING MAYWEATHER DEFENDANTS’ 12(B)(6) MOTION TO DISMISS [Filed concurrently with Notice of Motion; Memorandum of Points and Authorities; and Declaration of Ruth A. Bahe-Jachna] Courtroom: 850 Judge: Hon. R. Gary Klausner Hearing Date: None scheduled Hearing Time: None scheduled Case 2:15-cv-06574-RGK-PLA Document 48-6 Filed 09/07/16 Page 1 of 12 Page ID #:536 1 MAYWEATHER DEFENDANTS’ [PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING 12(B)(6) MOTION TO DISMISS 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 ORDER Before the Court is the Federal Rule of Civil Procedure Rule 12(B)(6) Motion to Dismiss (1) Mahoney v. Pacquiao, et al. [California]; (2) Alessi v. Top Rank, Inc., et al. [Connecticut]; (3) Brady v. Emmanuel Pacquiao, et al. [Florida]; (4) Gomez, et al. v. Top Rank, Inc., et al. [Illinois]; (5) Bradley v. Emmanuel Pacquiao, et al. [Michigan]; (6) Neidl v. Top Rank, Inc., et al. [Nevada]; (7) Bobadilla v. Top Rank, Inc., et al. [New Jersey]; (8) Barrios, et al. v. Emmanuel Pacquiao, et al. [New York]; (9) Gordon, et al. v. Showtime Networks, Inc., et al. [Pennsylvania]; (10) Rodriguez, et al. v. Emmanuel Pacquiao, et al. [Puerto Rico]; (11) Thrailkill v. Top Rank, Inc., et al. [South Carolina]; (12) Crabtree v. Pacquiao, et al. [Tennessee]; (13) Craig, et al. v. Emmanuel Pacquiao, et al. [Texas]; (14) Jammers, Inc. v. Top Rank, Inc., et al. [Commercial Plaintiffs]; and (15) DeHart, et al. v. Top Rank, Inc., et al. [Live Attendees] (collectively “Plaintiffs’ Complaints”) brought by Defendants Floyd Mayweather and Mayweather Promotions LLC (

  8. Lisette Nazario v. Top Rank, Inc. et al

    NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION to Dismiss Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12

    Filed September 7, 2016

    te 3100 Chicago, Illinois 60601 Telephone: (312) 456-8421 Facsimile: (312) 456-8435 Attorneys for Defendants Floyd Mayweather and Mayweather Promotions LLC UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA - WESTERN DIVISION IN RE: PACQUIAO-MAYWEATHER BOXING MATCH PAY-PER-VIEW LITIGATION This document relates to: ALL CASES MDL No. 2:15-ml-02639-RGK (PLAx) [MDL No. 2639] [PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING MAYWEATHER DEFENDANTS’ 12(B)(6) MOTION TO DISMISS [Filed concurrently with Notice of Motion; Memorandum of Points and Authorities; and Declaration of Ruth A. Bahe-Jachna] Courtroom: 850 Judge: Hon. R. Gary Klausner Hearing Date: None scheduled Hearing Time: None scheduled Case 2:15-cv-06564-RGK-PLA Document 58-6 Filed 09/07/16 Page 1 of 12 Page ID #:543 1 MAYWEATHER DEFENDANTS’ [PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING 12(B)(6) MOTION TO DISMISS 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 ORDER Before the Court is the Federal Rule of Civil Procedure Rule 12(B)(6) Motion to Dismiss (1) Mahoney v. Pacquiao, et al. [California]; (2) Alessi v. Top Rank, Inc., et al. [Connecticut]; (3) Brady v. Emmanuel Pacquiao, et al. [Florida]; (4) Gomez, et al. v. Top Rank, Inc., et al. [Illinois]; (5) Bradley v. Emmanuel Pacquiao, et al. [Michigan]; (6) Neidl v. Top Rank, Inc., et al. [Nevada]; (7) Bobadilla v. Top Rank, Inc., et al. [New Jersey]; (8) Barrios, et al. v. Emmanuel Pacquiao, et al. [New York]; (9) Gordon, et al. v. Showtime Networks, Inc., et al. [Pennsylvania]; (10) Rodriguez, et al. v. Emmanuel Pacquiao, et al. [Puerto Rico]; (11) Thrailkill v. Top Rank, Inc., et al. [South Carolina]; (12) Crabtree v. Pacquiao, et al. [Tennessee]; (13) Craig, et al. v. Emmanuel Pacquiao, et al. [Texas]; (14) Jammers, Inc. v. Top Rank, Inc., et al. [Commercial Plaintiffs]; and (15) DeHart, et al. v. Top Rank, Inc., et al. [Live Attendees] (collectively “Plaintiffs’ Complaints”) brought by Defendants Floyd Mayweather and Mayweather Promotions LLC (

  9. Christopher Vallaro v. Emmanuel J. Pacquiao et al

    NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION to Dismiss Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12

    Filed September 7, 2016

    te 3100 Chicago, Illinois 60601 Telephone: (312) 456-8421 Facsimile: (312) 456-8435 Attorneys for Defendants Floyd Mayweather and Mayweather Promotions LLC UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA - WESTERN DIVISION IN RE: PACQUIAO-MAYWEATHER BOXING MATCH PAY-PER-VIEW LITIGATION This document relates to: ALL CASES MDL No. 2:15-ml-02639-RGK (PLAx) [MDL No. 2639] [PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING MAYWEATHER DEFENDANTS’ 12(B)(6) MOTION TO DISMISS [Filed concurrently with Notice of Motion; Memorandum of Points and Authorities; and Declaration of Ruth A. Bahe-Jachna] Courtroom: 850 Judge: Hon. R. Gary Klausner Hearing Date: None scheduled Hearing Time: None scheduled Case 2:15-cv-06570-RGK-PLA Document 34-6 Filed 09/07/16 Page 1 of 12 Page ID #:444 1 MAYWEATHER DEFENDANTS’ [PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING 12(B)(6) MOTION TO DISMISS 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 ORDER Before the Court is the Federal Rule of Civil Procedure Rule 12(B)(6) Motion to Dismiss (1) Mahoney v. Pacquiao, et al. [California]; (2) Alessi v. Top Rank, Inc., et al. [Connecticut]; (3) Brady v. Emmanuel Pacquiao, et al. [Florida]; (4) Gomez, et al. v. Top Rank, Inc., et al. [Illinois]; (5) Bradley v. Emmanuel Pacquiao, et al. [Michigan]; (6) Neidl v. Top Rank, Inc., et al. [Nevada]; (7) Bobadilla v. Top Rank, Inc., et al. [New Jersey]; (8) Barrios, et al. v. Emmanuel Pacquiao, et al. [New York]; (9) Gordon, et al. v. Showtime Networks, Inc., et al. [Pennsylvania]; (10) Rodriguez, et al. v. Emmanuel Pacquiao, et al. [Puerto Rico]; (11) Thrailkill v. Top Rank, Inc., et al. [South Carolina]; (12) Crabtree v. Pacquiao, et al. [Tennessee]; (13) Craig, et al. v. Emmanuel Pacquiao, et al. [Texas]; (14) Jammers, Inc. v. Top Rank, Inc., et al. [Commercial Plaintiffs]; and (15) DeHart, et al. v. Top Rank, Inc., et al. [Live Attendees] (collectively “Plaintiffs’ Complaints”) brought by Defendants Floyd Mayweather and Mayweather Promotions LLC (

  10. Erika Jimenez et al v. Top Rank, Inc. et al

    NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION to Dismiss Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12

    Filed September 7, 2016

    te 3100 Chicago, Illinois 60601 Telephone: (312) 456-8421 Facsimile: (312) 456-8435 Attorneys for Defendants Floyd Mayweather and Mayweather Promotions LLC UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA - WESTERN DIVISION IN RE: PACQUIAO-MAYWEATHER BOXING MATCH PAY-PER-VIEW LITIGATION This document relates to: ALL CASES MDL No. 2:15-ml-02639-RGK (PLAx) [MDL No. 2639] [PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING MAYWEATHER DEFENDANTS’ 12(B)(6) MOTION TO DISMISS [Filed concurrently with Notice of Motion; Memorandum of Points and Authorities; and Declaration of Ruth A. Bahe-Jachna] Courtroom: 850 Judge: Hon. R. Gary Klausner Hearing Date: None scheduled Hearing Time: None scheduled Case 2:15-cv-06615-RGK-PLA Document 55-6 Filed 09/07/16 Page 1 of 12 Page ID #:501 1 MAYWEATHER DEFENDANTS’ [PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING 12(B)(6) MOTION TO DISMISS 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 ORDER Before the Court is the Federal Rule of Civil Procedure Rule 12(B)(6) Motion to Dismiss (1) Mahoney v. Pacquiao, et al. [California]; (2) Alessi v. Top Rank, Inc., et al. [Connecticut]; (3) Brady v. Emmanuel Pacquiao, et al. [Florida]; (4) Gomez, et al. v. Top Rank, Inc., et al. [Illinois]; (5) Bradley v. Emmanuel Pacquiao, et al. [Michigan]; (6) Neidl v. Top Rank, Inc., et al. [Nevada]; (7) Bobadilla v. Top Rank, Inc., et al. [New Jersey]; (8) Barrios, et al. v. Emmanuel Pacquiao, et al. [New York]; (9) Gordon, et al. v. Showtime Networks, Inc., et al. [Pennsylvania]; (10) Rodriguez, et al. v. Emmanuel Pacquiao, et al. [Puerto Rico]; (11) Thrailkill v. Top Rank, Inc., et al. [South Carolina]; (12) Crabtree v. Pacquiao, et al. [Tennessee]; (13) Craig, et al. v. Emmanuel Pacquiao, et al. [Texas]; (14) Jammers, Inc. v. Top Rank, Inc., et al. [Commercial Plaintiffs]; and (15) DeHart, et al. v. Top Rank, Inc., et al. [Live Attendees] (collectively “Plaintiffs’ Complaints”) brought by Defendants Floyd Mayweather and Mayweather Promotions LLC (