Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_07-cv-00778/USCOURTS-caed-1_07-cv-00778-4/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Access America
Defendant
BCS Insurance Company
Defendant
John Wallace
Plaintiff
Norma Wallace
Plaintiff
World Access Service Corporation
Defendant

Document Text:

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 LA #593432 v1 -1- 

[PROPOSED] ORDER DENYING IN PART 

AND GRANTING IN PART MOTION TO 

DISMISS COMPLAINT

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

JOHN WALLACE and NORMA 

WALLACE, 

Plaintiffs, 

vs. 

BCS INSURANCE COMPANY, WORLD 

ACCESS SERVICE CORPORATION, 

ACCESS AMERICA 

and DOES 1 through 25, inclusive, 

Defendants. 

Case No.: 1:07-CV-00778-OWW-SMS 

ORDER DENYING IN PART AND 

GRANTING IN PART WITH LEAVE TO 

AMEND DEFENDANTS’ MOTION AND 

MOTION TO DISMISS PLAINTIFFS’ 

AMENDED COMPLAINT 

 

The Motion to Dismiss of Defendants BCS Insurance Company and World Access Service 

Corporation, also erroneously sued as Access America, came on for hearing in this Court on 

September 24, 2007 before the Honorable Oliver W. Wanger. 

The Court having considered the papers filed in support of and in opposition to the Motion 

and having heard the argument of counsel, 

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 

1. Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss the First Cause of Action on the ground that 

Plaintiffs lack standing under 18 U.S.C. § 1962 is DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. 

PDF created with pdfFactory trial version www.pdffactory.com

Case 1:07-cv-00778-OWW -SMS Document 109 Filed 01/28/08 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 LA #593432 v1 -2- 

[PROPOSED] ORDER DENYING IN PART 

AND GRANTING IN PART MOTION TO 

DISMISS COMPLAINT

2. Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss the Fourth Cause of Action on the ground that 

Plaintiffs lack of standing under California Business and Professions Code section 17200 is 

DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. 

3. Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss the First Cause of Action on the ground that the 

“enterprise” is not adequately pleaded under 18 U.S.C. § 1962 is DENIED. 

4. Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss the First Cause of Action on the ground that no use 

or investment of racketeering income is alleged under 18 U.S.C. § 1962 is GRANTED WITH 

LEAVE TO AMEND. 

5. Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss the First Cause of Action on the ground that 

Plaintiffs failed to allege that Defendants participated in the affairs of the enterprise under 18 

U.S.C. § 1962 is DENIED. 

6. Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss the First Cause of Action on the ground that 

Plaintiffs failed to sufficiently allege an injury under 18 U.S.C. § 1962 is DENIED. 

7. Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss the First Cause of Action on the ground that 

Plaintiffs failed to plead predicate acts of mail and wire fraud under 18 U.S.C. § 1962 with the 

particularity required by Rule 9(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure is DENIED. 

8. Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss the First Cause of Action on the ground that 

Plaintiffs failed to state a claim for conspiracy under 18 U.S.C. § 1962 is DENIED. 

9. Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss the Fourth Cause of Action on the ground that 

Plaintiffs have not alleged any injury as a result of the conduct alleged as the basis of their claim 

under California Business and Professions Code section 17200 is DENIED. 

10. Plaintiffs shall file a Second Amended Complaint within 20 days of service of this 

Order. 

DATED: January 25, 2008 /s/ OLIVER W. WANGER 

Hon. Oliver W. Wanger 

United States District Judge 

PDF created with pdfFactory trial version www.pdffactory.com

Case 1:07-cv-00778-OWW -SMS Document 109 Filed 01/28/08 Page 2 of 2