EH Tech Inc. v. Cresco Labs Inc. et al
| EH Tech Inc. doing business as Natures Market doing business as Cresco Labs Inc. |
| Cresco Labs Inc. and Does 1 through 10 inclusive |
| 8:2023cv00837 |
| May 15, 2023 |
| US District Court for the Central District of California |
| Fred W Slaughter |
| Autumn D Spaeth |
| Other Statutes: Arbitration |
| 09 U.S.C. § 0009 Petition to Confirm Arbitration Award |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on May 30, 2023. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 18
ORDER GRANTING Stipulation of Voluntary Dismissal Without Prejudice of Entire Action #17 by Judge Fred W. Slaughter the following: The above-captioned action is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE in its entirety as to all parties and all claims for relief. Each party shall bear their own attorneys' fees and costs. (Made JS-6. Case Terminated.) (jp)
|
| Filing 17 STIPULATION to Dismiss Case pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1)(A)(ii) filed by Plaintiff EH Tech Inc.. (Attachments: #1 Proposed Order)(Reeves, Jeffrey) |
|
Filing 16
MINUTES (IN CHAMBERS) ORDER UNSEALING CASE; DENYING RELIEF SOUGHT ON AN EX PARTE BASIS #1 , #7 , #12 ; STRIKING IMPROPER FILINGS #2 , #5 ; AND ORDERING PLAINTIFF TO SHOW CAUSE RE: DISMISSAL FOR LACK OF SUBJECT MATTER JURISDICTION by Judge Fred W. Slaughter: Accordingly, the court orders as follows: 1. Plaintiff is ORDERED to show cause, in writing, on or before May 30, 2023, why this case should not be dismissed without prejudice for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. Any adequate response to the courts order must be accompanied by a proposed complaint or other proper case initiating document filed as a separate document on the case docket, with an appropriate declaration made under penalty of perjury. Failure to comply with this directive by the deadline set by the court may result in dismissal of this action. See Chambers v. NASCO, Inc., 501 U.S. 32, 44 (1991); Ferdik v. Bonzelet, 963 F.2d 1258, 1260 (9th Cir. 1992); Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b). 2. To the extent Plaintiff seeks ex parte relief to compel arbitration, that request (Dkts. 1, 7) is DENIED for the reasons stated above. Accordingly, Plaintiff's second ex parte request to set a hearing date on its ex parte petition to compel arbitration (Dkt. 12) is similarly DENIED. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 78(b); L.R. 7-15. The court expresses no view on the merits of any contemplated motion to compel arbitration. 3. Because the court denies request for Plaintiff's ex parte relief and both the application to seal and petition to compel arbitration are deficient as discussed above, the relevant corresponding documents (Dkts. 2, 5) are STRICKEN from the case docket. As above, the court's order should not be construed as expressing an opinion on the merits of any motion. 4. The clerk shall UNSEAL this case in its entirety, with the exception of Dkts. 2 and 5, which shall remain nonpublic because the court does not reach the merits of Plaintiff's sealing requests and those documents have been stricken as stated above. 5. Plaintiff is ORDERED to serve Defendant with a copy of this Order and each of the materials it filed on the docket in this matter, including those stricken by this Order, on or before May 30, 2023. 6. Any documents filed with the court must comply with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the Central District of Californias Local Rules, and this court's rules and procedures, including any and all meet and confer requirements. Given the record before the court, further violations of the applicable rules and procedures may result in sanctions, including and up to dismissal, for violations of court orders and/or failure to make a reasonable inquiry into the procedures governing civil actions filed in this court. See Chambers, 501 U.S. at 44; Ferdik, 963 F.2d at 1260; Holgate v. Baldwin, 425 F.3d 671, 675-76 (9th Cir. 2005); Fed. R. Civ. P. 11(b), (c)(1), (c)(3), 41(b);L.R. 83-7. (bm)
|
| Filing 15 DECLARATION OF GARRET S. LLEWELLYN IN SUPPORT OF CRESCO LABS, INC.'S OPPOSITION TO PETITIONER'S EX PARTE APPLICATION TO SPECIALLY SET THE HEARING ON ITS PETITION TO COMPEL ARBITRATION #14 (bm) |
| Filing 14 CRESCO LABS, INC.'S OPPOSITION TO PETITIONER'S EX PARTE APPLICATION TO SPECIALLY SET THE HEARING ON ITS PETITION TO COMPEL ARBITRATION #12 filed by Respondent Cresco Labs Inc. (Attorney Joseph M. Wahl added to party Cresco Labs Inc.(pty:res), Attorney Garrett Scott Llewellyn added to party Cresco Labs Inc.(pty:res))(bm) |
| Filing 13 DECLARATION OF DANIEL L. WEISS IN SUPPORT OF EX PARTE APPLICATION TO SPECIFICALLY SET THE HEARING ON PETITIONER EH TECH, INC.'S PETITION TO COMPEL ARBITRATION #12 filed by Petitioner EH Tech Inc. (bm) |
| Filing 12 EX PARTE APPLICATION TO SPECIFICALLY SET THE HEARING ON PETITIONER EH TECH INC.'S PETITION TO COMPEL ARBITRATION filed by plaintiff EH Tech Inc. (Attachments: #1 Proposed Order) (bm) |
| Filing 11 Notice to Counsel Re Consent to Proceed Before a United States Magistrate Judge. (sh) |
| Filing 10 NOTICE TO PARTIES OF COURT-DIRECTED ADR PROGRAM filed. (sh) |
| Filing 9 NOTICE OF ASSIGNMENT to District Judge Fred W. Slaughter and Magistrate Judge Autumn D. Spaeth. (sh) |
| Filing 6 REDACTED DECLARATION of Daniel L. Weiss re PETITION TO COMPEL ARBITRATION(case opening) #1 filed by Petitioner EH Tech Inc. (sh) |
| Filing 1 REDACTED PETITION TO COMPEL ARBITRATION filed against Cresco Labs Inc., Does.(Filing fee $ 402 FEE PAID.), filed by Petitioner EH Tech Inc.. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet) (sh) |
| Filing 8 DECLARATION of Maryam Arshad In Support of EX PARTE APPLICATION for Order for EX PARTE APPLICATION FOR LEAVE TO FILE UNDER SEAL CERTAIN SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS AND PORTIONS OF DOCUMENTS FILED IN CONNECTION WITH EH TECH INCS PETITION TO COMPEL ARBITRATION #7 filed by Petitioner EH Tech Inc. (sh) |
| Filing 7 EX PARTE APPLICATION FOR LEAVE TO FILE UNDER SEAL CERTAIN SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS AND PORTIONS OF DOCUMENTS FILED IN CONNECTION WITH EH TECH INCS PETITION TO COMPEL ARBITRATION filed by Petitioner EH Tech Inc. (Attachments: #1 Proposed Order) (sh) |
| Filing 5 STRICKEN PURSUANT TO COURT ORDER DATED 5/23/23, DKT. NO. #16 . SEALED UNREDACTED DECLARATION of Daniel L. Weiss re PETITION TO COMPEL ARBITRATION (case opening) #2 filed by Petitioner EH Tech Inc. (sh) Modified on 5/23/2023 (bm). |
| Filing 4 CERTIFICATION AND NOTICE of Interested Parties filed by Petitioner EH Tech Inc., (sh) |
| Filing 3 21 DAY Summons Issued re Petition (case opening) #2 as to Respondent Cresco Labs Inc. (sh) |
| Filing 2 STRICKEN PURSUANT TO COURT ORDER DATED 5/23/23, DKT. NO. #16 . SEALED UNREDACTED PETITION TO COMPEL ARBITRATION filed against Cresco Labs Inc., Does 1-10 (Filing fee $ 402 FEE PAID.) filed by Petitioner EH Tech Inc. (sh) Modified on 5/23/2023 (bm). |
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 California Central District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
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.
