BETH BERAROV, & ANNELISA BINDRA, Plaintiffs, v. ARCHERS-DANIELS-MIDLAND COMPANY, & ADM ALLIANCE NUTRITION, INC., Defendants., No. 16 C 7355, 2019 WL 277717 (N.D. Ill. Jan. 22, 2019) After plaintiffs’ horses died from ingestion of monensin, plaintiff Beth Berarov (“Berarov”) and Annelisa Bindra (“Bindra”) filed against defendants Archer-Daniels-Midland Company and ADM Alliance Nutrition, Inc. (“ADM Alliance”) (the manufacturer of the horse feed plaintiffs allege contained monensin) a six-count, purported class-action complaint asserting claims under the Illinois Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act and the Illinois Consumer Fraud and Deceptive Business Practices Act, as well as claims for negligent misrepresentation, product liability, unjust enrichment and breach of express warranty. Defendants move to dismiss. The Court granted in part and denies in part defendants’ motion to dismiss.
RESOLUTE FOREST PRODUCTS, INC., et al., Plaintiffs, v. GREENPEACE INTERNATIONAL, et al., Defendants. Additional Party Names: Amy Moas, Daniel Brindis, Fibrek Gen. P’ship, Fibrek Int’l, Inc., Fibrek U.S., Inc., ForestEthics, Greenpeace Fund, Inc., Greenpeace, Inc., Matthew Daggett, Resolute FP Augusta, LLC, Resolute FP Canada, Inc., Resolute FP US, Inc., Rolf Skar, Todd Paglia, No. 17-CV-02824-JST, 2019 WL 281370 (N.D. Cal. Jan. 22, 2019)
Plaintiffs Resolute Forest Products, Inc., Resolute FP US, Inc., Resolute FP Augusta, LLC, Fibrek General Partnership, Fibrek U.S., Inc., Fibrek International, Inc., and Resolute FP Canada, Inc. (collectively, “Resolute” or “Plaintiffs”), filed this case alleging claims for violation of the federal RICO laws1 as well as state law claims including defamation and tortious interference with prospective and contractual business relations. Defendants are the environmental groups Greenpeace and Stand, as well as several of their employees and officers. The Court granted Defendants’ previous motions to dismiss Resolute’s initial complaint. Resolute filed an amended complaint. (“FAC”). Defendants now bring three renewed motions to dismiss and strike.
In one motion, Defendants Stand, formerly known as ForestEthics, and Todd Paglia, the organization’s Executive Director, move to dismiss Resolute’s amended complaint under Rule 12(b)(6) with prejudice and to strike it under California’s “anti-SLAPP” statute, which provides grounds to dismiss actions deemed Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation, Cal. Civ. Proc. Code § 425.16. In a second motion, Defendant Greenpeace Fund, Inc. (“Greenpeace Fund”) moves to dismiss under Rule 12(b)(6) and to strike. Finally, Defendants Greenpeace International, Greenpeace, Inc., Greenpeace, Inc. employees Daniel Brindis, Amy Moas, and Rolf Skar, and Greenpeace International employee Matthew Daggett (collectively, the “Greenpeace Defendants”) move to dismiss. The Court granted the motions in part and denied them in part.