On August 28, 2019 a
Order
was filed
involving a dispute between
Doe #10,
Doe #11,
Doe #12,
Doe #13,
Doe #14,
Doe #15,
Doe #16,
Doe #17,
Doe #18,
Doe #19,
Doe #1,
Doe #2,
Doe #3,
Doe #4,
Doe #5,
Doe #6,
Doe #7,
Doe #8,
Doe #9,
and
Ascension Ventures Ii Ewc, Inc.,
Ascension Ventures, Inc.,
Does 1 -200 Inclusive,
Does 1-400, Inclusive,
Fortyfour Stones, Llc,
Massage Envy Franchising, Llc,
Me Time, Inc.,
Rme Clinics, Inc.,
S&C Therpy, Inc.,
for Complex Civil Unlimited
in the District Court of San Bernardino County.
Preview
SAN MATEO COUNTY
0m 3‘0 2020
Clerk of
mFyfiXi/COU"
By DEPUWCL'ERK
'
SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY 0F SAN MATEO.
COMPLEX CIVIL LITIGATION
JANE DOE #3, et al.,
Plaintiffs,
'
Case NOW 1 29 0 3 2
_
Assigned for all purposes to Dept. 2
Hon. Marie S. Wciner
'
vs.
_
ORDER DENYING EX PARTE
MASSAGE ENVY FRANCHISING MOTION FOR STAY
LLC, et al.,
Defendants;
/
I
JANE DOE #8, ét al., Case No. 19CIVOO392A
Plaintiffs, ‘
Assigned for all purposes to Dept. 2
vs. Hon. Marie S. Wciner
MASSAGE ENVY FRANCHISING ORDER DENYING EX PARTE
'MOTION FOR STAY
‘
LLC, et al., -
Defendants. -
JANE DOE #4, et al., Case No. 19CIV003 92B
Plaintiffs,
Assigned for all'purposes to Dept. 2
VS. Hon. Marie S. Weiner
MASSAGE ENVY FRANCMSING ORDER DENYING EX PARTE
LLC, et aL, MOTION FOR STAY
Defendants.
JANE DOE #1, et al., Case No. 19CIV003 92C
Plaintiffs, .
Assigned for all purposes to Dept. 2
VS. Hon. Marie S. Weiner
MASSAGE ENVY-FRANCHISING ORDER DENYING EX PARTE
LLC, et a1.,
‘
MOTION FOR STAY
Defendants.
JANE DOE #2, et a1., Case No. i9c1voo392D
Plaintiffs,
Assigned for all purposes to Dept. 2
vs. Hon. Marie S. Weiner
MAS SAGE ENVY FRANCHISWG ORfiER DENYING EX PARTE
LLC, et a1., MOTION FOR STAY
Defendants.
JANE DOE #7, Case No. 19CIV00392E
Plaintiff,
Assigled for all purposes to Dept. 2
VS. Hon. Marie S. Weiner
MASSAGE ENVY FRANCHISING ORDER DENYING EX PARTE
LLC, et a1., MOTION FOR STAY
Defendants.
Document Filed Date
October 30, 2020
Case Filing Date
August 28, 2019
Category
Complex Civil Unlimited
For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.
Preview
SAN MATEO COUNTY 0m 3‘0 2020 Clerk of mFyfiXi/COU" By DEPUWCL'ERK ' SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY 0F SAN MATEO. COMPLEX CIVIL LITIGATION JANE DOE #3, et al., Plaintiffs, ' Case NOW 1 29 0 3 2 _ Assigned for all purposes to Dept. 2 Hon. Marie S. Wciner ' vs. _ ORDER DENYING EX PARTE MASSAGE ENVY FRANCHISING MOTION FOR STAY LLC, et al., Defendants; / I JANE DOE #8, ét al., Case No. 19CIVOO392A Plaintiffs, ‘ Assigned for all purposes to Dept. 2 vs. Hon. Marie S. Wciner MASSAGE ENVY FRANCHISING ORDER DENYING EX PARTE 'MOTION FOR STAY ‘ LLC, et al., - Defendants. - JANE DOE #4, et al., Case No. 19CIV003 92B Plaintiffs, Assigned for all'purposes to Dept. 2 VS. Hon. Marie S. Weiner MASSAGE ENVY FRANCMSING ORDER DENYING EX PARTE LLC, et aL, MOTION FOR STAY Defendants. JANE DOE #1, et al., Case No. 19CIV003 92C Plaintiffs, . Assigned for all purposes to Dept. 2 VS. Hon. Marie S. Weiner MASSAGE ENVY-FRANCHISING ORDER DENYING EX PARTE LLC, et a1., ‘ MOTION FOR STAY Defendants. JANE DOE #2, et a1., Case No. i9c1voo392D Plaintiffs, Assigned for all purposes to Dept. 2 vs. Hon. Marie S. Weiner MAS SAGE ENVY FRANCHISWG ORfiER DENYING EX PARTE LLC, et a1., MOTION FOR STAY Defendants. JANE DOE #7, Case No. 19CIV00392E Plaintiff, Assigled for all purposes to Dept. 2 VS. Hon. Marie S. Weiner MASSAGE ENVY FRANCHISING ORDER DENYING EX PARTE LLC, et a1., MOTION FOR STAY Defendants.