Shloss v. Sweeney et al Doc.

49
Case 5:06-cv-03718-JW Document 49 Filed 01/11/2007 Page 1 of 2

1 Maria K. Nelson (State Bar No. 155,608)

mknelson@jonesday.com
2 Anna E. Raimer (State Bar No. 234,794)
aeraimer@jonesday.com
3 JONES DAY
555 South Flower Street
4 Fiftieth Floor
Los Angeles, CA 90071-2300
5 Telephone: (213) 489-3939
Facsimile: (213) 243-2539
6
Attorneys for Defendants
7 SEÁN SWEENEY AND THE ESTATE OF JAMES
JOYCE
8

9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

10 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

11

12 CAROL LOEB SHLOSS, Case No. CV 06-3718 JW HRLx

13 Plaintiff, DEFENDANTS’ STATEMENT OF

RECENT DECISION IN SUPPORT
14 v. OF DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO
DISMISS, OR IN THE
15 SEÁN SWEENEY, in his capacity as ALTERNATIVE TO STRIKE,
trustee of the Estate of James Joyce, and CAROL LOEB SHLOSS’S
16 THE ESTATE OF JAMES JOYCE, AMENDED COMPLAINT

17 Defendants. Date: January 29, 2007

Time: 9:00 a.m.
18 Judge: The Honorable James
Ware
19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28
Case No. C06-3718 JW HRL
LAI-2841731v1
STATEMENT OF RECENT DECISION

Dockets.Justia.com
 Case 5:06-cv-03718-JW Document 49 Filed 01/11/2007 Page 2 of 2

1 Defendants Seán Sweeney and the Estate of James Joyce (hereinafter “Defendants”)
2 respectfully submit, pursuant to Northern District of California Civil Local Rule 7-3(d), this
3 Statement of Recent Decision in support of Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss, or in the Alternative
4 to Strike, Carol Loeb Shloss’s Complaint. The Northern District of California has recently issued
5 an Order granting a Motion to Dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction in a similar case.
6 See Sandisk Corp. v. Audio MPEG, Inc., et al., No. C-06-02655 RMW (N.D. Cal. Jan. 3, 2007)
7 (Exhibit A).
8
Dated: January 11, 2007 Respectfully submitted,
9
JONES DAY
10

11
By: /s/
12 Maria K. Nelson
13 Counsel for Defendants
SEÁN SWEENEY AND THE ESTATE OF
14 JAMES JOYCE
15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28
Case No. C06-3718 JW HRL
LAI-2841731v1
-2- STATEMENT OF RECENT DECISION