SIMKE, CHODOS & SASAKI, LLP. JUDITH M. SASAKI (Bar #119442) DAVID A. PASH (Bar #111 124) 1880 Century Park East, Suite [511 Los Angeles, California 90067-1615 Telephone: (310) 20: Fax: 310) 203-3866 Attomeys for Defendants Christopher Belland and John Petrovitz UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA QED PRODUCTIONS, LLC, et all Case No. 07-CV-00225 SVW (SSx) [The Hon, Stephen V. Wilson] Plaintiffs, NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION OF DEFENDANTS CHRISTOPHER BELLAND AND JOHN PETROVITZ TO 1) DISMISS SECOND [ENDED COMPLAINT FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM FOR WHICH RELIEF CAN BE GRANTED; AND 2 FOR A MORE DEFINITE, ‘ATEMENT; MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN SUPPORT OF MOTION vs. JAMES NESFIELD, et al Defendants. Date: November 17, 2008 Time: 1:30 p.m. Crerm: 6 ‘This Motion is filed following a “meet and confer” by correspondence on October 17, 2008, in compliance with Local Rule 7,3. NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION TO DISMISS SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT, ETC, 1TO PLAINTIFFS AND TO THEIR COUNSEL OF RECORD: PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that on November 17, 2008, at 1:30 p.m., or as soon thereafter as counsel may be heard, in Courtroom 6 of the United States District Court, located at 312 North Spring Street, Los Angeles, Defendants Chris Belland and John Petrovitz will and hereby move to be dismissed from the First (Copyright Infringement), Eighth (Interference with Contractual Relations), Ninth (Interference with Prospective Business Advantage), Tenth (Unfair Business Practices), Twelfth (Aid and Abettor Liability) and Thirteenth (Declaratory Relief) claims for relief in Plaintiffs? Second Amended Complaint in this action. This Motion is made pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure on the ground that the First, Eighth, Ninth, and Twelfth causes of action fail to state a claim on which relief can be granted because Plaintiffs have not pleaded around the false allegations regarding the ownership of the copyrights at issue set out in their Original Complaint, and on the further ground that the Tenth (Unfair Business Practices) and Thirteenth (Declaratory Relief regarding SLE Agreement) claims for relief fail to state a claim on which relief can be granted because there is no wrongdoing alleged in those causes of action as against Belland and Petrovitz. In addition, Defendants Belland and Petrovitz hereby move for a more definite statement pursuant to Rule 12(b)(2) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure on the ground that the Second Amended Compliant is ambiguous because it fails to identify which parties are the subject of each cause of action. Hip NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION TO DISMISS SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT, ETC. 2‘The Motion is based on this Notice, the accompanying Memorandum of Points and Authorities, the Second Amended Complaint in this action, and on such other and further matters as may be presented at the hearing Dated: October 22, 2008 SIMKE, CHODOS & SASAKI, LLP By. “~~ JUDITH M. SASAKI Attorneys for Defendants Christopher Belland and Johin Petrovitz NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION TO DISMISS SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT, ETC. 3