Opinion
No. CV11-1850-PHX-DGC
02-29-2012
Dancesport Videos, LLC, an Arizona limited liability company, Plaintiff, v. James and Jaana Kunitz, husband and wife; and Digital Video Creations, LLC, an Arizona limited liability company, Body FX, LLC, a Nevada limited liability company, Defendants.
ORDER
Plaintiff filed a complaint alleging twelve claims against Defendants. Doc. 1. In lieu of a response, Defendants filed a motion for a more definite statement under Federal Rules Civil Procedure 12(e). Doc. 24. The motion is fully briefed and no party has requested oral argument. Defendants' motion for a more definite statement is granted.
Under Rule 12(e), if a complaint is so vague or ambiguous that a party cannot reasonably be required to frame a responsive pleading, the defendant may move for an order requiring a more definite statement by pointing out the defects complained of and the details desired. Bautista v. County of L.A., 216 F.3d 837, 843 n.1 (9th Cir. 2000). Having reviewed the compliant and the parties' briefs, the Court agrees that a more definite statement of the Plaintiff's claim is required. The complaint does not identify specifically where the alleged trademark related claims occurred. Nor does it identify specific copyright registrations that were allegedly infringed or clearly identify the infringing party.
Defendants' motion sufficiently identifies the complaint's defects and the details desired. Doc. 24. The Court will grant the motion.
IT IS ORDERED:
1. Defendants' motion for a more definite statement (Doc. 24) is granted.
2. Plaintiff shall file an amended complaint by March 15, 2012.
____________
David G. Campbell
United States District Judge