Ben & Jerry's Franchising, Inc. v. MPA Group, Inc., et al.
| Ben & Jerry's Franchising, Inc. and Ben & Jerry's Homemade, Inc. |
| MPA Group, Inc. and Mehrdad Porghavami |
| 2:2007cv02599 |
| December 3, 2007 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of California |
| Sacramento Office |
| Sacramento |
| Dale A. Drozd |
| Lawrence K. Karlton |
| Contract: Franchise |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 2201 Declaratory Judgement |
| None |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
262
JUDGMENT signed by Judge John A. Mendez on 11/23/09; 207 Motion for Summary Judgment GRANTED in favor of Wonder Ice Cream LLC. (Manzer, C)
|
|
Filing
260
ORDER signed by Judge John A. Mendez on 11/20/09 ORDERING Ben and Jerry's Motion for Summary Judgment 207 is GRANTED in its entirety; Mehrdad Prghavami's Motion for Summary Judgment 219 is DENIED in its entirety; judgment is entered in of Ben and Jerry's Franchising Inc and Ben and Jerry's Homemade Inc and against Mehrdad Prghavami on the third and fifth claims for relief of the First Amended Complaint 65 ; Ben & Jerrys Motion for Summary Judgment on the Seventh Claim fo r Relief of the First Amended Complaint (for Declaratory Relief) is moot based on the granting of Ben & Jerrys Motion for Summary Judgment on the counterclaims of the Second Amended Counterclaim; Default judgment is entered in favor of Ben & Jerrys F ranchising, Inc. and Ben & Jerrys Homemade, Inc. and against MPA Group, Inc. (MPA) on the Second and Third Claims for Relief of the First Amended Complaint because MPAs answer to those claims has been previously stricken by this Court by Order, dated 8/31/09 199 ; Mehrdad Porghavami and MPA are ordered to pay Ben & Jerrys Twelve Thousand Seven Hundred and Fifty Seven Dollars ($12,757) within 60 days of the date of this Order; and it is declared that Ben & Jerrys is not liable to Mehrdad Porghavami or MPA for any of the counterclaims asserted by them; and it is declared that Ben & Jerrys is the prevailing party and is awarded costs of suit in the amount to be determined by application to the clerk of the court. (Carlos, K)
|
|
Filing
254
ORDER signed by Judge John A. Mendez on 11/19/2009granting 253 Request to seal documents filed by Mehrdad Porghavami. (Waggoner, D)
|
|
Filing
235
ORDER signed by Judge John A. Mendez on 11/3/09, ORDERING that Exhibits 5, 13, 14 and 23 to dft Mehrdad Porghavami's Opposition to Pltf's Motion for Summary Judgment are to be filed under SEALED. (Kastilahn, A)
|
|
Filing
199
ORDER signed by Judge John A. Mendez on 08/28/09 ORDERING that the 148 , 156 Motions to Strike are GRANTED in its entirety and, accordingly, 70 MPA Group, Inc.'s Answer to the First Amended Complaint and MPA's 73 Second Amended Count er-Claim against Ben & Jerry's and Wonder are hereby STRICKEN and MPA Group, Inc.'s claims are DISMISSED. Counter-Claimants/Dfts' 146 , 147 Motions to Exclude the Expert Witness Testimony and Reports of Robert H. Wallace and Gerard S. Clancy are DENIED w/o prejudice to them being refiled at time of trial. (Benson, A.)
|
|
Filing
191
ORDER signed by Judge John A. Mendez on 8/25/09 ORDERING that 132 Ben & Jerry's Motion to Strike Porghavami's demand for jury trial is GRANTED with respect to claims against Ben & Jerrys. (Kastilahn, A)
|
|
Filing
164
STIPULATION and ORDER signed by Judge John A. Mendez on 07/20/09; the date for filing dispositive motions will be extended to at least 30 days from the date of the Court's ruling on motions to dismiss and strike the answer and cross complaint; the Court shall set a specific date following the ruling. (Manzer, C)
|
|
Filing
99
ORDER signed by Judge John A. Mendez on 4/6/09 re 98 ORDERING that the Scheduling Order is AMENDED as follows: Designation of Expert Witnesses ddl 5/15/2009; Discovery ddl 7/6/2009; Dispositive Motion ddl 8/5/2009; Dispositive Motion Hearing ddl 9/9/2009. (Duong, D)
|
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 Eastern 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.
