Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_07-cv-01610/USCOURTS-caed-1_07-cv-01610-13/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 830
Nature of Suit: Patent
Cause of Action: 28:2201 Declaratory Judgement

---

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 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

DELANO FARMS COMPANY; FOUR 

STAR FRUIT, INC.; AND GERAWAN 

FARMING, INC.,

 Plaintiffs,

 v.

THE CALIFORNIA TABLE GRAPE 

COMMISSION; UNITED STATES OF 

AMERICA; UNITED STATES 

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE; 

AND TOM VILSACK, SECRETARY 

OF THE UNITED STATES 

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 

(IN HIS OFFICIAL CAPACITY),

 Defendants.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

1:07-cv-01610-OWW-SMS

ORDER DISMISSING PLAINTIFFS’ 

SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT 

WITHOUT LEAVE TO AMEND AND 

DENYING AS MOOT PLAINTIFFS’ 

MOTION FOR CERTIFICATION OF 

ORDERS FOR INTERLOCUTORY 

APPEAL PURSUANT TO 28 U.S.C. § 

1292(b) 

Upon consideration of Defendants United States of America, the United States Department 

of Agriculture, and Tom Vilsack, Secretary of the United States Department of Agriculture’s 

(“Federal Defendants”) Motion To Dismiss Plaintiffs’ Second Amended Complaint (Doc. 99) and 

supporting papers; Defendant The California Table Grape Commission’s (“Commission”) Motion 

To Dismiss Plaintiffs’ Second Amended Complaint (Doc. 101) and supporting papers; Plaintiffs 

Delano Farms Company, Four Star Fruit, Inc., and Gerawan Farming, Inc.’s (“Plaintiffs”) opposition 

memorandum; and the arguments of the parties, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT, for the reasons 

set forth in the Court’s Memorandum Decision filed July 26, 2010 (Doc. 121), and the Court’s prior 

decisions in this matter, the Federal Defendants’ Motion To Dismiss is GRANTED, the 

Commission’s Motion To Dismiss is GRANTED, and Plaintiffs’ Second Amended Complaint is 

DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE and WITHOUT LEAVE TO AMEND.

In light of the Court’s dismissal of Plaintiffs’ Second Amended Complaint without leave to 

amend, IT IS HEREBY FURTHER ORDERED THAT Plaintiffs’ Motion for Certification of Orders 

for Interlocutory Appeal Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1292(b) (Doc. 93) is DENIED AS MOOT.

Case 1:07-cv-01610-SEH-JLT Document 123 Filed 08/02/10 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

The Clerk of the Court shall enter judgment dismissing this action in its entirety with 

prejudice.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: August 2, 2010 /s/ Oliver W. Wanger 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE DEAC_Signature-END:

emm0d64h

Case 1:07-cv-01610-SEH-JLT Document 123 Filed 08/02/10 Page 2 of 2