Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_14-cv-02560/USCOURTS-cand-3_14-cv-02560-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 196
Nature of Suit: Franchise
Cause of Action: 28:1332 Diversity-Breach of Contract

---

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

United States District Court

Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

MARK ANDERSEN, et al.,

Plaintiffs,

v.

GRISWOLD INTERNATIONAL, LLC, et 

al.,

Defendants.

Case No. 14-cv-02560-EDL 

ORDER RE PLAINTIFFS' 3/24/15 

LETTER

Re: Dkt. No. 74

On March 24, 2015, Plaintiffs filed a letter attaching a copy of the Ninth Circuit’s decision 

in Picot v. Weston, 14-2765 (Mar. 19, 2015), and arguing that the decision bears on Defendants’ 

pending motion to dismiss. (Dkt. 58.) Plaintiffs’ letter violates Civil Local Rule 7-3(d)(1), which 

allows counsel to file a statement of recent decision but prohibits counsel from making argument 

in connection with such a statement. Accordingly, the Court will consider the Picot decision but 

not the analysis contained in Plaintiffs’ letter.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: March 25, 2015

________________________

ELIZABETH D. LAPORTE

United States Magistrate Judge

Case 3:14-cv-02560-EDL Document 76 Filed 03/25/15 Page 1 of 1