EHealthline.com, Inc. v. Pharmaniaga Berhad

District Court, E.D. California·Decided October 5, 2020·No. 2:18-cv-01069·Unknown

Opinion

E*HEALTHLINE.COM, INC., a Delaware No. 2:18-cv-1069-MCE-EFB corporation, Plaintiff, v. PHARMANIAGA BERHAD, and HOLDING GROUP COMPANY Defendants. Plaintiff’s motion for default judgment against Modern Industrial Investment Holding Group Company Limited (“Modern”) was submitted for decision without oral argument by the magistrate judge on February 25, 2020. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to Local Rule 302(c)(19) and 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). On September 11, 2020, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations herein which contained notice to the parties that any objections to the findings and recommendations were to be filed within fourteen days. Plaintiff filed objections on September 24, 2020, and they were considered by the undersigned. This Court reviews de novo those portions of the proposed findings of fact to which objection has been made. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Commodore 2.40 VLU INS EP MUO VO POO Ie OY oe

Business Machines, 656 F.2d 1309, 1313 (9th Cir. 1981), cert. denied, 455 U.S. 920 (1982). As to any portion of the proposed findings of fact to which no objection has been made, the court assumes its correctness and decides the motions on the applicable law. See Orand v. United States, 602 F.2d 207, 208 (9th Cir. 1979). The magistrate judge’s conclusions of law are reviewed de novo. See Britt v. Simi Valley Unified Sch. Dist., 708 F.2d 452, 454 (9th Cir. 1983). The Court has reviewed the applicable legal standards and, good cause appearing, concludes that it is appropriate to adopt the proposed Findings and Recommendations in full. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 1. The Findings and Recommendations filed September 11, 2020, are ADOPTED in full. 2. Plaintiff's motion for default judgment (ECF No. 81) is DENIED for lack of personal jurisdiction. 3. Having determined that this Court lacks jurisdiction over Plaintiff's claims against Modern, that Defendant is hereby DISMISSED without prejudice. 4. The Clerk of the Court is directed to close this case. Dated: October 4, 2020 Eo { late rf LEK. is SENIOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

EHealthline.com, Inc. v. Pharmaniaga Berhad, (E.D. Cal. 2020).

EHealthline.com, Inc. v. Pharmaniaga Berhad (EHealthline.com, Inc. v. Pharmaniaga Berhad) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related