Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_09-cv-00720/USCOURTS-casd-3_09-cv-00720-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 290
Nature of Suit: Other Real Property Actions
Cause of Action: 15:1601 Truth in Lending

---

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

1 09cv720 BTM (AJB)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

CATALINA PENA,

Plaintiff,

Case No. 09cv720 BTM (AJB)

ORDER DENYING MOTION TO

v. DISMISS

CARA BROOKS CORPORATION

DEFINED BENEFIT PENSION PLAN, et

al.

Defendants.

Defendant Jasmine Moore has filed a motion to dismiss the claims against her [Doc.

99]. She is pro se and fails to argue why the Second Amended Complaint does not state a

claim. Although she says that she has “no relationship to this matter,” Plaintiffs allege she

received some of the money from the allegedly fraudulent loan at issue here. On a motion

to dismiss, the Court must take the Plaintiffs allegations as true. See Parks Sch. of Bus., Inc.

v. Symington, 51 F.3d 1480, 1484 (9th Cir. 1995). The Court therefore declines to dismiss

the claims for an accounting, conversion and violation of the California Business &

Professions Code against her.

Moore’s arguments are better suited for a motion for summary judgment, not a motion

to dismiss. Her motion is DENIED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: July 7, 2010

Honorable Barry Ted Moskowitz

United States District Judge

Case 3:09-cv-00720-BTM-NLS Document 108 Filed 07/07/10 Page 1 of 1