Emery Mukendi Wafwana & Associates, P.C. v. Mengara

Background

The plaintiffs filed a Second Amended Complaint asserting claims under Section 43(a) of the Lanham Act, a federal trademark statute; common-law trademark infringement; conversion; breach of care against Daniel Mengara; and interference with a business relationship against Elite Law Firm, SCP and Eugenie Elanga Monkango. The claims were asserted against the defendants identified in the complaint.

Daniel Mengara and Emery Mukendi Wafwana & Associés, SCP moved to dismiss under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1), 12(b)(2), and 12(b)(6), which address jurisdiction, personal jurisdiction, and failure to state a legally sufficient claim. The opinion states that Elite Law Firm, SCP and Eugenie Elanga Monkango had not been served with the Second Amended Complaint.

Report and Recommendation

Magistrate Judge Parker recommended that the court grant the motion and dismiss the Second Amended Complaint in its entirety without prejudice. The parties were given fourteen days to file objections, and no party filed an objection.

Because there were no objections, the district court reviewed the recommendation for clear error on the face of the record. The court stated that its review revealed no clear error. The opinion does not provide the underlying reasoning from the recommendation for dismissing the claims.

Ruling

Judge Valerie Caproni adopted the report and recommendation in full, granted the defendants’ motion to dismiss, and dismissed the case without prejudice. The order also stated that the failure to object precluded appellate review. It certified that any appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied permission to proceed without paying filing fees for an appeal. The clerk was directed to terminate the motions at docket entries 114 and 117.