Edwards v. Vemma Nutrition et al
Plaintiff: John Edwards
Defendant: Vemma Nutrition and Unknown Parties
Case Number: 2:2017cv02133
Filed: July 3, 2017
Court: US District Court for the District of Arizona
Office: Phoenix Division Office
County: XX US, Outside State
Presiding Judge: David G Campbell
Nature of Suit: Copyrights
Cause of Action: 17:101
Jury Demanded By: Plaintiff

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed Document Text
July 23, 2019 Opinion or Order Filing 181 ORDER: IT IS ORDERED as follows: 1. Counsel's second motion to withdraw as counsel (Doc. 170 ) is denied. Counsel's request for a hearing on its motion to withdraw is denied. 2. If, after carefully reviewing this Order, Counsel conclud es that information presently unknown to the Court would justify withdrawal, and that the information is subject to attorney-client privilege, Counsel may by July 26, 2019 file an ex parte motion under seal, explaining the reasons justifying withd rawal. 3. Counsel's motion to intervene (Doc. 172 ) is denied. 4. Counsel's motion for extension of time to respond to the pending motions for attorneys' fees (Doc. 177 ) is denied. 5. Plaintiff's "Motion" (Doc. 179 ), to the extent it seeks waiver of the Ninth Circuit docketing and filing fees, is denied. This Court has no jurisdiction over a Ninth Circuit appeal. Any requests related to that appeal must be directed to the Ninth Circuit, not this Court [see attached Order for details]. Signed by Judge Dominic W Lanza on 7/23/19. (MAW)
July 3, 2019 Opinion or Order Filing 165 ORDER: IT IS ORDERED that Counsel's Request for Clarification (Doc. 161 ) is granted in part and denied in part. Clarification is provided by this Order. The request that the Court reconsider its denial of the application for withdrawal of co unsel is denied. The request that the Court reconsider its June 27, 2019 Order denying Edwards's request for leave to file a motion for reconsideration is denied. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Counsel's Request for Leave to File Reply on Application for Withdrawal of Counsel Without Consent (Doc. 162 ) is denied [see attached Order for details]. Signed by Judge Dominic W Lanza on 7/3/19. (MAW)
June 19, 2019 Opinion or Order Filing 156 ORDER - Defendants Vemma Vitamins Pty. Limited and Tarak Mehta are dismissed without leave to amend. The Clerk of Court shall enter judgment accordingly. Any defendant wishing to file a motion for attorneys' fees must do so within 14 days of entry of judgment; and all motions for an award of attorneys' fees shall be accompanied by an electronic Microsoft Excel spreadsheet, to be emailed to the Court and opposing counsel, containing an itemized statement of legal services with all information required by Local Rule 54.2(e)(1). See document for complete details. Signed by Judge Dominic W Lanza on 6/18/19. (MSA)
June 14, 2019 Opinion or Order Filing 154 ORDER - IT IS ORDERED that Counsel's Application for Withdrawal of Counsel Without Consent (Doc. 151 ) is denied without prejudice. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that by June 17, 2019, Counsel may file an ex parte motion under seal, explaining the re asons justifying withdrawal. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that if Plaintiff or Defendants wish to oppose Counsel's withdrawal, they may file a memorandum setting forth their reasons by June 27, 2019. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Application for Withdrawal of Counsel Without Consent (Doc. 153 ) filed by the law firm J. Clark Law Firm, PLLC and attorney Justin M. Clark is denied. Signed by Judge Dominic W Lanza on 6/13/19. (LAD)
May 20, 2019 Opinion or Order Filing 148 ORDER: The Motion of Tom and Bethany Alkazin to Dismiss for Lack of Personal Jurisdiction Or, in the Alternative, to Compel Arbitration (Doc. 112 ) is granted. Defendant Vemma Holdings, Inc.'s Motion to Dismiss Second Amended Complaint (Doc. [ 114]) is granted. Former Defendant Haresh Mehta's Motion to Clarify Dismissal and Alternative Renewal of Motion to Dismiss (Doc. 131 ) is granted. Tom and Bethany Alkazin and Haresh Mehta are dismissed without leave to amend. Vemma Holdings i s dismissed with prejudice. By June 3, 2019, Edwards must file a written memorandum, not to exceed ten pages, showing cause why the SAC should not be dismissed as to Vemma Vitamins and Tarak Mehta for failure to serve the FAC and the SAC and for lack of personal jurisdiction. The movants' various requests for attorneys' fees are denied without prejudice. See document for complete details. Signed by Judge Dominic W Lanza on 5/20/19. (EJA)
December 17, 2018 Opinion or Order Filing 143 ORDER: IT IS ORDERED that: (1) The motion to strike, or alternatively for leave to file a sur-reply (Doc. 134 ) is DENIED; (2) The motion to strike (Doc. 136 ) is DENIED; and (3) The motion for extension (Doc. 140 ) is GRANTED, such that Plaintiff has 14 days from the date of this Order to file a response to Mehta's motion to dismiss. No further extension requests will be considered [see attached Order for details]. Signed by Judge Dominic W Lanza on 12/17/18. (MAW)
July 20, 2018 Opinion or Order Filing 99 ORDER - 1. Defendant Haresh Mehta's Motion to Dismiss, (Doc. 57 ), is GRANTED. 2. Defendants Tom and Bethany Alkazin's Motion to Dismiss, (doc. 74 ), is GRANTED with leave to amend within 30 days. 3. Defendant Vemma International Holdings Inc.'s Motion to Dismiss, (doc. 70 ), is GRANTED with leave to amend within 30 days. 4. Plaintiff John Edwards may amend the complaint to clarify which allegations and claims apply to Vemma International Holdings and to state facts, if any, which suggest that Plaintiff was harmed in Arizona by the conduct of the Alkazins. (See document for further details). Signed by Judge G Murray Snow on 7/20/18. (LAD)
January 31, 2018 Opinion or Order Filing 61 ORDER - Vemma's motion to compel arbitration and dismiss (Doc. 18 ) is granted.Plaintiff's claims against Vemma are subject to arbitration, and those claims are dismissed without prejudice. Plaintiff's motion for leave to file sur-reply (Doc. 30 ) is denied in light of the opportunity Plaintiff's counsel was given to address all of the issues in this case during oral argument. Signed by Judge David G Campbell on 01/30/2018. (KAS)
Access additional case information on PACER

Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.

Access this case on the Arizona District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Edwards v. Vemma Nutrition et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: John Edwards
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Vemma Nutrition
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Unknown Parties
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?