United States District Court, N.D. California
January 23, 2004.
ROGER FREY, Derivatively on Behalf of Nominal Defendant, NASSDA CORPORATION, Plaintiff,
BERNARD ARONSON, AN-CHANG DENG, YEN-SON HUANG, SANG S. WANG AND EDWARD C.V. WINN, Defendants, and NASSDA CORPORATION, Nominal Defendant
The opinion of the court was delivered by: SUSAN ILLSTON, District Judge
ORDER DISMISSING CASE FOR LACK
OF SUBJECT MATTER JURISDICTION
On January 23, 2004, this Court heard argument on defendants' motion
to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, or in the
alternative, to stay plaintiff's derivative complaint. The parties
informed the court during oral argument that they had agreed to stipulate
to stay the lawsuit. This Court, however, dismisses the lawsuit for lack
of subject matter jurisdiction, since it is not ripe for
There appears to be some merit in defendants' argument
that the lawsuit should be stayed under the Colorado River
doctrine, as set forth in Colorado River Water Conservation
District, 424 U.S. 800
(1976), but the Court will not address this
argument since the case is not ripe. The Court denies as moot defendants'
other motion to dismiss the complaint under Rules 12(b)(6) and 23.1 of
the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. [Docket ## 21, 22]
IT IS SO ORDERED.