Judge: Teresa A. Beaudet, Case: 21STCV04269, Date: 2023-02-15 Tentative Ruling
Case Number: 21STCV04269 Hearing Date: February 15, 2023 Dept: 50
|
290 beowawie llc, Plaintiff, vs. indinero inc., et al., Defendants. |
Case No.: |
21STCV04269 |
|
Hearing Date: |
February 15, 2023 |
|
|
Hearing Time: |
10:00 a.m. |
|
|
[TENTATIVE] ORDER RE: MOTION OF PLAINTIFF 290 BEOWAWIE LLC FOR ORDER CORRECTING NAME OF
DEFENDANT PRY FINANCIALS INC. TO DEFENDANT BREX PRY FINANCIALS LLC |
||
Background
Plaintiff
290 Beowawie LLC (“Plaintiff”) filed this action on February 2, 2021.
On
October 25, 2022, Plaintiff filed the operative Second Amended Complaint
(“SAC”) against Defendants Indinero Inc., Jessica Mah, Andy Su aka Andrew Su
aka Dizhe Su, Employees First Advocates LLC, Pry Financials Inc., Brex Pry
Financials LLC, and Hayden Jensen. The SAC asserts causes of action for (1)
breach of contract, (2) relief against avoidable transfers and/or obligations,
(3) breach of fiduciary duty, (4) quia timet, and (5) unjust enrichment.
Plaintiff
now moves for an order
correcting the name of Defendant Pry Financials Inc. to
Defendant Brex Pry Financials LLC. Pry Financials Inc. and Brex Pry Financials
LLC (jointly, “Defendants”) oppose.
Discussion
In the motion,
Plaintiff indicates that it “seeks
an order correcting the name of Defendant Pry Financials Inc. to Defendant Brex
Pry Financials LLC based on the fact that on or about April 19, 2022, Defendant Pry
Financials Inc. merged with Defendant Brex Pry Financials LLC, leaving the
surviving entity, Defendant Brex Pry Financials LLC.” (Mot. at p. 1:9-12.)
As
an initial matter, the instant motion was filed by Plaintiff on June 15, 2022.
Thereafter, on
October 20, 2022, the Court granted Plaintiff’s motion for leave to file a
second amended complaint. On October 25, 2022, Plaintiff filed the operative SAC against, inter
alia, Pry Financials Inc. and Brex Pry Financials LLC. The Court thus
agrees with Defendants
that Plaintiff’s motion is moot.[1]
Conclusion
Based on the foregoing, Plaintiff’s
motion is denied as moot.
Plaintiff is ordered to
give notice of this ruling.
DATED:
________________________________
Hon. Teresa A.
Beaudet
Judge, Los
Angeles Superior Court
[1]The Court notes
that Plaintiff did not file a reply in support of the motion and thus does not
dispute that the motion is moot.