San Diego-based stem cell business Stemgenex is the subject of a suit over allegations about stem cell treatments. The company has now filed a motion to dismiss the case.
To me as a non-attorney, the Stemgenex motion to dismiss seems to emphasize overall vagueness of the plaintiff’s case and argues in part that there is insufficient detailed support of each claim.
From my reading of the plaintiff’s suit document, the case seems focused on alleged issues with Internet marketing claims and it provides details mainly on that level. Are all nine claims related to that? I’m not sure.
The motion to dismiss also asserts that there is a lack of detail on the specific alleged roles of each defendant as pertains to the nine claims. I’m more accustomed to reading, writing, and critiquing scientific materials (e.g. papers and grants), so court documents seem somewhat foreign to me and I don’t know what the expectations are for claims. I do feel like there are some lacunae in terms of specific details of the nine claims in the case, but is that par for the course at this stage?
Stay tuned as we all learn more about this situation and hopefully one or more experts in legal matters will weigh in on it.
I’m not a lawyer but what is obvious in the motion to dismiss the case is a complete lack of refutation of the allegations made against Stemgenex. The motion simply tries to invalidate the allegations by showing that they were not made against any specific individual and therefore cannot be defended or proven. It’s classic legalese.
This will not enable the case to be dismissed, but the plaintiff will have to select one or more of the group to which the allegations can be directed. Depending on how Judge Battaglia sees the allegations he will then have to assess whether such a specification is now unfair to the named accused.