Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_13-cv-04115/USCOURTS-cand-3_13-cv-04115-11/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 410
Nature of Suit: Antitrust
Cause of Action: 15:15 Antitrust Litigation

---

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

STEPHEN FENERJIAN, et al.,

Plaintiffs,

v.

NONG SHIM COMPANY, LTD, et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. 13-cv-04115-WHO 

ORDER REGARDING STATEMENT IN 

SUPPORT OF DISMISSAL BY KOREA 

YAKULT AND PALDO CO.

Re: Dkt. No. 152

Korea Yakult Company, Ltd. and Paldo Company, Ltd were named as defendants in the 

original consolidated direct and indirect purchaser complaints. The claims against them were 

dismissed with leave to amend. Dkt. No. 115. They now seek to be dismissed with prejudice 

under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b) because they are not named as defendants in the 

amended and operative complaints and the time for amending pleadings has passed.1 Dkt. No. 

152. 

Dismissal with prejudice is not appropriate at this point. There is no benefit to piecemeal

appeals in this case, as I stated at the case management conference on December 16, 2014. Dkt. 

No. 155 at 8-9. It is also possible that plaintiffs in the future will try to show good cause to add 

Korea Yakult and Paldo as defendants in this action as a result of information learned in 

discovery. 

Korea Yakult and Paldo mistakenly believed that they had an obligation to appear at future 

proceedings even though they are no longer named as defendants in either of the operative 

complaints. They have no such obligation unless they are brought back into the case.

 

1

The direct purchasers did not file an amended complaint. The indirect purchasers filed an 

amended complaint which did not name Korea Yakult and Paldo as defendants. Dkt. No. 121.

Case 3:13-cv-04115-WHO Document 163 Filed 03/30/15 Page 1 of 2
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

United States District Court

Northern District of California

CONCLUSION

Korea Yakult’s and Paldo’s requests to be dismissed with prejudice are DENIED. Korea 

Yakult and Paldo are relieved of any obligation to appear at case management conferences or 

other hearings in this matter unless plaintiffs move, and the Court grants, a motion for leave to add 

them as defendants.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: March 30, 2015

______________________________________

WILLIAM H. ORRICK

United States District Judge

Case 3:13-cv-04115-WHO Document 163 Filed 03/30/15 Page 2 of 2