Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-4_05-cv-02550/USCOURTS-cand-4_05-cv-02550-3/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Judd Brazer
Defendant
Amin El-Gazzar
Defendant
Pasquale Giordano
Defendant
Steven T. Kirsch
Plaintiff
Vision Lab Telecommunications, Inc.
Defendant

Document Text:

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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

STEVEN T. KIRSCH,

Plaintiff,

v.

VISION LAB TELECOMMUNICATIONS,

INC., a Florida corporation; AMIN ELGAZZAR; PASQUALE GIORDANO; and

JUDD BRAZER

Defendants. _______________________________________

No. C 05-2550 SBA

 

ORDER

[Docket Nos. 7, 8 & 9]

On September 23, 2005, Defendants Amin El-Gazzar, Pasquale Giordano and Judd Brazer

("Individual Defendants") and Vision Lab Telecommunications, Inc. filed a Motion to Dismiss

Plaintiff's Complaint Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure Rule 12(b)(6) and Motion for More

Definite Statement Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(e) [docket no. 8], and a Motion to Stay

Discovery [docket no. 9]. Also on September 23, 2005, the Individual Defendants filed a Federal

Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(2) Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Personal Jurisdiction [docket no. 7]. 

All Defendants' motions were noticed for hearing on December 6, 2005. On November 19, 2005

Plaintiff filed a First Amended Complaint [docket no. 34]. Defendants' above-referenced Rule 12

motions therefore now pertain to a complaint that is no longer operative as it has been superceded by

the First Amended Complaint. 

Good cause appearing,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT Defendants' above-referenced Rule 12 motions are

DENIED as moot. In their Motion to Stay Discovery, Defendants request the Court to stay

Case 4:05-cv-02550-SBA Document 48 Filed 11/23/05 Page 1 of 2
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

2

discovery in this case pending the resolution of Defendants' Rule 12 motions. As the Rule 12

motions have been denied by the Court, the Motion to Stay is rendered moot. Consequently, this

Court hereby DENIES Defendants' Motion to Stay. 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT the Case Management Conference in this matter is

CONTINUED to February 15, 2006 at 2:30 p.m.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

 Dated: 11/23/05 SAUNDRA BROWN ARMSTRONG

United States District Judge

Case 4:05-cv-02550-SBA Document 48 Filed 11/23/05 Page 2 of 2