From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

MCW, Inc. v. Badbusinessbureau.com, L.L.C.

United States District Court, N.D. Texas
Apr 19, 2004
CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:02-CV-2727-G (N.D. Tex. Apr. 19, 2004)
Download
PDF
Check
Treatment

Summary

holding that Rules 12(b) and 12(h) operate to exempt a second Rule 12(b) motion from Rule 12(g)'s consolidation requirement

Summary of this case from Stoffels ex rel. SBC Tel. Concession Plan v. SBC Commc'ns, Inc.
See 6 Summaries

Opinion

CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:02-CV-2727-G

April 19, 2004

JUDGMENT

A. JOE FISH, Chief Judge, District

This judgment is entered pursuant to F.R. CIV. P. 58 and the memorandum order of this date. For the reasons stated in that memorandum order, it is ORDERED that (1) the claims in Counts I, II, III, and V of the Plaintiff's First Amended Complaint are DISMISSED for failure to state a claim on which relief can be granted, (2) the claim in Count IV of the Plaintiff's First Amended Complaint is DISMISSED for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, without prejudice to its being refiled in an appropriate state court, and (3) the defendants shall recover from the plaintiff their costs of court.

Summaries of

MCW, Inc. v. Badbusinessbureau.com, L.L.C.

United States District Court, N.D. Texas
Apr 19, 2004
CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:02-CV-2727-G (N.D. Tex. Apr. 19, 2004)

holding that Rules 12(b) and 12(h) operate to exempt a second Rule 12(b) motion from Rule 12(g)'s consolidation requirement

Summary of this case from Stoffels ex rel. SBC Tel. Concession Plan v. SBC Commc'ns, Inc.

concluding that the defendant could be held liable for actively soliciting defamatory content and for creating "disparaging titles, headings, and editorial messages"

Summary of this case from Dart v. Craigslist, Inc.

dismissing the plaintiff's claim of unfair competition under the Lanham Act, where the plaintiff assisted individuals with career counseling and the defendant operated a for-profit consumer complaint forum

Summary of this case from Virginia Polytechnic Ins. St. Univ. v. Hokie Real E

stating that "even if a party is improperly named in a proceeding, or not named at all, it is not thereby precluded from becoming a de facto intervenor" and finding that party "became a de facto intervening party to these proceedings when it participated in the Rule 12(b) motion"

Summary of this case from Samuels Group v. Hatch Grading Contracting

In MCW, Inc., in ruling on a motion to dismiss, the district court for the Northern District of Texas rejected the defendants' argument that they were entitled to immunity under the CDA.

Summary of this case from Whitney Information Network, Inc. v. Xcentric Ventures

noting that "[d]efendants wishing to object to personal jurisdiction 'must do so in their first defensive move, be it in a Rule 12 motion or a responsive pleading'"

Summary of this case from Duncan v. Williams
Case details for

MCW, Inc. v. Badbusinessbureau.com, L.L.C.

Case Details

Full title:MCW, INC. d/b/a BERNARD HALDANE ASSOCIATES, Plaintiff v…

Court:United States District Court, N.D. Texas

Date published: Apr 19, 2004

Citations

CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:02-CV-2727-G (N.D. Tex. Apr. 19, 2004)

Citing Cases

GW Equity LLC v. Xcentric Ventures LLC

Plaintiff objects to the magistrate judge's finding that there is no genuine issue of fact regarding whether…

Clear Def., L.L.C. v. Cleardefense Pest Control of Greensboro, LLC

Nevertheless, since trademark infringement plaintiffs are not exempted from standard plausibility pleading…

34 Citing Cases