Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_06-cv-02306/USCOURTS-cand-3_06-cv-02306-12/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 820
Nature of Suit: Copyright
Cause of Action: 17:101 Copyright Infringement

---

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

PACIFIC INFORMATION RESOURCES,

INC.,

Plaintiff,

 v.

DIANA MUSSELMAN, et al.,

Defendants

 /

No. C-06-2306 MMC

ORDER DISCHARGING IN PART

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE; DIRECTING

PLAINTIFF TO SHOW CAUSE WHY

CLAIMS AGAINST THREE

DEFENDANTS SHOULD NOT BE

DISMISSED

By order filed November 1, 2006, the Court ordered plaintiff Pacific Information

Resources, Inc. to show cause why its claims against certain defendants should not be

dismissed, on the ground such defendants are not properly joined herein. By order filed

January 5, 2007, the Court discharged the order to show cause as to 13 defendants,

specifically, Airon Corporation, Alexei Borisov, Levon Gasparian, Renee Dunbar, Peter

Dunbar, Paretologic, Inc., Adrian Pereira, Elton Pereira, Jason-Leo Carvallo, Rosson

Ventures, Linda Rosson, Barry Rosson, and Matthew Rosson. Additionally, in its January

5, 2007 order, the Court ordered plaintiff to make a further showing, at the January 26,

2007 case management conference, as to the propriety of joining herein plaintiff’s claims

against 8 other defendants, specifically, Diana Musselman, William M. Tiepelman, Linda L.

Tiepelman, Mediachoice, Inc., Arnold E. Kuenn, Andrea Kuenn, Zaba, Inc., and Robert

Case 3:06-cv-02306-MMC Document 122 Filed 03/12/07 Page 1 of 2
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

Zakari.

On January 25, 2007, plaintiff filed a Third Amended Complaint, in which plaintiff no

longer alleges any claims against Arnold E. Kuenn, Andrea Kuenn, Zaba, Inc., and Robert

Zakari. Accordingly, the Court’s order to show cause, as to those four defendants, is

hereby DISCHARGED as moot.

On January 25, 2007, plaintiff filed the Third Expert Declaration Report of Ran

Libeskind Hadas, Ph.D., the content of which the Court finds sufficient to show cause why

the Court should not sua sponte dismiss plaintiff’s claims against Diana Musselman. 

Accordingly, the Court’s order to show cause, as to said defendant, is hereby

DISCHARGED.

With respect to the remaining three defendants for which the order to show remains

in effect, specifically, William M. Tiepelman, Linda L. Tiepelman, and Mediachoice, Inc.,

plaintiff has failed to make any showing to show why the joinder of said defendants is

proper. Nevertheless, in light of plaintiff’s representations at the January 26, 2007 case

management conference that plaintiff had settled, or was in the process of settling, with

said defendants, the Court has not dismissed plaintiff’s claims against those defendants. 

To date, however, plaintiff has not filed a notice of dismissal of said defendants in light of a

settlement, nor has plaintiff otherwise informed the Court as to the status of such

settlement. Accordingly, the Court hereby gives plaintiff notice that it will dismiss plaintiff’s

claims against Williams M. Tiepelman, Linda L. Tiepelman, and Mediachoice, Inc., for lack

of proper joinder and without prejudice, unless plaintiff, no later than March 23, 2007, files a

notice of dismissal in light of a settlement or indicates why, in light of a pending settlement

or otherwise, its claims against said three defendants should not dismissed.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: March 12, 2007 

MAXINE M. CHESNEY

United States District Judge

Case 3:06-cv-02306-MMC Document 122 Filed 03/12/07 Page 2 of 2