Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_06-cv-04898/USCOURTS-cand-3_06-cv-04898-17/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 410
Nature of Suit: Antitrust
Cause of Action: 28:1332 Diversity-Petition for Removal

---

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

For the Northern District of California

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

G&C AUTO BODY INC,

 Plaintiff,

 v.

GEICO GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY,

Defendant. /

No. C06-04898 MJJ

ORDER STRIKING PORTIONS OF

DEFENDANTS’ “PARTIAL SUMMARY

JUDGMENT” MOTIONS

The Court is in receipt of three summary judgment motions that Defendants have noticed for

hearing on January 8, 2008, after a November 20, 2007 hearing on two earlier partial summary judgment

motions brought by Defendants. From the Court’s initial review, it is evident that two of these motions

– (1) Defendants’ Motion For Partial Summary Judgment That G&C Auto Body, Inc. Is A Public Figure

For Purposes Of G&C’s Commercial Defamation Claim (Docket No. 277), and (2) Defendants’ Motion

For Partial Summary Judgment That Plaintiffs May Not Recover Punitive Damages (Docket No. 271)

– each seek to resolve less than an entire claim at issue in the case. The Court regard these motions to

resolve sub-issues of claims as improper under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56(d). See Arado v.

General Fire Extinguisher Corp., 626 F. Supp. 506, 509 (N.D. Ill. 1985); SEC v. Thrasher, 152 F. Supp.

2d 291, 295 (S.D.N.Y. 2001) (summary judgment is not a “vehicle for fragmented adjudication of nondeterminative issues”). The Court declines to resolve the issues raised by these seriatim and piecemeal

motions in advance of the pretrial conference and therefore STRIKES both motions. 

Defendants’ Motion For Partial Summary Judgment That Cal. Ins. Code § 758.5(c) Cannot

Case 3:06-cv-04898-JSW Document 287 Filed 12/12/07 Page 1 of 2
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

2

Constitutionally Prohibit Conduct At Issue and That GEICO’s Communications With Its Customers

About Repair Are Privileged As A Matter Of Law (Docket No. 274), also noticed for January 8, 2008,

will remain on calendar as it seeks adjudication of the entirety of Counts II and IV in Plaintiffs’

complaint. However, for the same reasons discussed above, the Court STRIKES the portion of this

motion that relates to Count I, as this portion of the motion seeks to adjudicate only a sub-issue of that

claim.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: December 12, 2007 

MARTIN J. JENKINS

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:06-cv-04898-JSW Document 287 Filed 12/12/07 Page 2 of 2