Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-4_06-cv-07541/USCOURTS-cand-4_06-cv-07541-8/pdf.json

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

---

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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

MINTEL LEARNING TECHNOLOGY, 

INC.,

Plaintiff, No. C 06-7541 PJH

v. ORDER DENYING MOTION 

TO DISMISS

BEIJING KAIDI EDUCATION & 

TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT CO., 

LTD., et al.,

Defendants.

_______________________________/

On August 30, 2007, defendants filed a motion for an order dismissing the claims

asserted against Beijing Kaidi Education & Technology Development Co., Ltd., and Yalin

Lin, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6), for failure to state a claim. In

support of the motion, defendants assert only that “[t]he [c]ourt’s reasoning in the August 9,

2007, Order (DOC 55) is fully applicable to this [m]otion.” 

That is not an adequate basis for bringing a motion to dismiss. The August 9, 2007,

order dismissed the claims asserted against defendants Jun Zhang and Yan Liu. 

Defendants do not explain how the “reasoning” in that 21-page order should be applied to

defendants Beijing Kaidi Education & Technology Development Co., Ltd., and the court is

not willing to guess. Moreover, defendants should not be forced to respond to a motion

that is so patently deficient. Accordingly, the motion is DENIED. 

 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: August 31, 2007 ______________________________

PHYLLIS J. HAMILTON

United States District Judge

Case 4:06-cv-07541-PJH Document 60 Filed 08/31/07 Page 1 of 1