Sonate Corporation v. Dunkin' Brands Group, Inc.

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA ORLANDO DIVISION

SONATE CORPORATION,

Plaintiff,

v. Case No. 6:22-cv-812-WWB-EJK

DUNKIN’ BRANDS GROUP, INC., DUNKIN’ BRANDS, INC. and BEYOND MEAT, INC.,

Defendants. / ORDER THIS CAUSE is before the Court on Defendants Dunkin’ Brands Group, Inc. and Dunkin’ Brands, Inc.’s (collectively, “Dunkin”) Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff’s Claim for Counterfeiting (Doc. 37). Therein, Dunkin seeks the dismissal of Plaintiff’s claim for counterfeiting and related damages pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). A motion asserting a defense under Rule 12(b) “must be made before pleading if a responsive pleading is allowed.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b). Here, Dunkin filed their Answer and Affirmative Defenses (Doc. 35) contemporaneously with their Motion to Dismiss. “An Answer filed contemporaneously with the filing of a Motion to Dismiss renders the motion moot and makes it procedurally impossible for the Court to rule on the motion to dismiss.” Smith v. Bank of Am., N.A., No. 2:11-cv-676-FtM, 2014 WL 897032, at *9 (M.D. Fla. Mar. 6, 2014) (quotation omitted); see also Veltre v. Sliders Seaside Grill, Inc., No. 3:15-cv- 1102-J, 2016 WL 524658, at *1 (M.D. Fla. Feb. 10, 2016) (denying as moot defendant’s motion to dismiss where answer was filed prior to the resolution of the motion to dismiss and collecting cases). Accordingly, it is ORDERED and ADJUDGED that the Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff's Claim for Counterfeiting (Doc. 37) is DENIED as moot. DONE AND ORDERED in Orlando, Florida on August 5, 2022.

WENDY W.B UNITED STATES T JUDG

Copies furnished to: Counsel of Record