Soares v. Varner

Opinion

9 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 SAN JOSE DIVISION 11

12 PAUL F. SOARES, Case No. 21-CV-04526-LHK

13 Plaintiff, ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO DISMISS WITH PREJUDICE 14 v. Re: Dkt. No. 30 15 WILLIAM VARNER, et al., 16 Defendants. 17 18 On September 27, 2021, Defendant Sunoco (“Sunoco”) filed a motion to dismiss for lack 19 of personal jurisdiction and for failure to state a claim. ECF No. 30. On November 5, 2021, 20 Plaintiff filed a notice stating that Plaintiff does not oppose Sunoco’s motion to dismiss and 21 requesting that the Court dismiss Plaintiff’s claims against Sunoco without prejudice. ECF No. 22 39. Thus, Plaintiff has failed to respond to Sunoco’s contentions that this Court lacks personal 23 jurisdiction over Sunoco and that Plaintiff has failed to state a claim against Sunoco. Plaintiff 24 filed this lawsuit against Sunoco on June 11, 2021, which required that Sunoco hire counsel and 25 file a motion to dismiss. If Plaintiff has any claims against Sunoco, Plaintiff must litigate them in 26 this lawsuit which Plaintiff initiated. Leave to amend in this instance would unduly prejudice 27 Sunoco, cause undue delay, and be futile. Leadsinger, Inc. v. BMG Music Publ’g, 512 F.3d 522, 1 532 (9th Cir. 2008). Thus, the Court GRANTS Sunoco’s motion to dismiss with prejudice and 2 vacates the January 27, 2022 hearing on that motion. 4 5 Dated: November 11, 2021 6 CA LUCY #H. KOH 7 United States District Judge 8 9 10 11 a 12 14

16 & 17 6 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Case No. 21-CV-04526-LHK