Public
- Public
- Network
- Groups
- Featured
- Popular
- People

Conversation

Notices

Embed this notice
Ashley M. Gjøvik, JD (ashleygjovik@mastodon.social)'s status on Thursday, 30-May-2024 09:49:08 JST Ashley M. Gjøvik, JD

You guys. The Jan 30 federal Gjovik v Apple decision, with a Judge complaining that I wrote the Gödel, Escher, Bach of complaints, has already become Northern District of California precedent - here it is cited in a San Jose Division case:
https://casetext.com/case/resh-inc-v-conrad-3
In conversation about 6 months ago from mastodon.social permalink
Attachments
1. These issues demonstrate Resh's failure to comply with Rule 8 and warrant dismissal. Courts in this district have dismissed complaints under similar circumstances. See Ashley M Gjovijk, v. Apple Inc., No. 23-CV-04597-EMC, 2024 WL 347922, at *2 (N.D. Cal. Jan. 30, 2024) (noting that complaint with more “than 150 pages and contain[ing] 440 paragraphs” failed to comply with Rule 8); Cotti v. California Dep't of Soc. Servs. Dir. Will Lightbourne, No. 18-CV-02980-BLF, 2018 WL 6660073, at *1 (N.D. Cal. Dec. 19, 2018) (“At 80 pages in length, with more than 300 paragraphs, the SAC does not satisfy” Rule 8); Yould, 2018 WL 4105094, at *4 (dismissing where complaint's “true substance is so well disguised by verbosity, confusion and redundancy that it must be dismissed for failure to comply” with Rule 8) (quotations omitted); Gottschalk, 964 F.Supp.2d at 1155 (dismissing complaint with confusing organization and generalized grievances). Accordingly, the Court GRANTS Defendants' motion to dismiss with leave to amend. Any amended complaint must be limited to 40 pages. The Court reminds Resh that it “is not expected to try the entirety of [its] case in the complaint.” Ashley M Gjovijk, 2024 WL 347922, at *2. Resh, Inc. v. Conrad, 22-cv-01427-EJD, 7 (N.D. Cal. Mar. 4, 2024)
  https://files.mastodon.social/media_attachments/files/112/527/122/898/328/238/original/6a65baaa9ed9b1b8.png
2. Untitled attachment

Public

Conversation

Notices

Feeds