Jim Williams v. Touchtunes Music Corp. ( 2016 )

FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
MAY 06 2016
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
JIM CODY WILLIAMS, No. 14-56055
Plaintiff - Appellant, D.C. No. 2:13-cv-04752-BRO-
JCG
v.
TOUCHTUNES MUSIC MEMORANDUM*
CORPORATION, a New York
corporation; TONY MASTRONARDI, an
individual; GUY NATHAN, an individual;
JOHN PERRACHON, an individual;
MATTHEW CARSON, an individual;
CHRIS MARCOLEFAS, an individual;
DAN MCALLISTER, an individual;
DOMINQUE DION, an individual,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Central District of California
Beverly Reid O’Connell, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted May 3, 2016**
Pasadena, California
*
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
**
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
Before: KOZINSKI, W. FLETCHER, and GOULD, Circuit Judges.
We affirm the district court’s dismissal with prejudice of Jim Cody
Williams’s Fourth Amended Complaint. The complaint alleges a unified course of
fraudulent conduct and is therefore subject to the heightened pleading standard of
Fed. R. Civ. P. 9(b). Rubke v. Capitol Bancorp Ltd., 551 F.3d 1156, 1161 (9th Cir.
2009). The operative complaint does not meet that standard because it does not
“state with particularity the circumstances constituting [the alleged] fraud.” Fed.
R. Civ. P. 9(b). The district court did not abuse its discretion in dismissing the
case with prejudice because Williams failed to cure this pleading defect after the
court gave Williams an opportunity to do so.
Defendant-Appellee’s Motion To Dismiss Notice Of Appeal and Motion For
Judicial Notice are denied as moot.
AFFIRMED.
2