ThermoLife International LLC v. Sechel Holdings Incorporated et al
ThermoLife International LLC |
Sechel Holdings Incorporated and Ergogenix Incorporated |
2:2014cv02291 |
October 15, 2014 |
US District Court for the District of Arizona |
Phoenix Division Office |
Maricopa |
James A Teilborg |
Other Fraud |
28 U.S.C. ยง 1332 |
Plaintiff |
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
Document Text |
---|
Filing 30 ORDER, Ergogenix's Motion to Set Aside Entry of Default 19 is denied as moot; the Court holds that the default entered on Plaintiff's original complaint was rendered non-existent as the result of Plaintiff filing its Amended Complaint; th e Clerk shall vacate the entry of default 10 ; Plaintiff's motion for default judgment 16 is denied as moot; Ergogenix's Motion for Leave to File Answer to Plaintiff's Complaint 22 is granted; the Court construes the motion to per tain to Plaintiff's Amended Complaint and grants Ergogenix leave to file its answer within ten days from the date of this Order; the Clerk shall strike Ergogenix's lodged answer 25 . Signed by Senior Judge James A Teilborg on 4/3/15. (REW) |
Filing 11 ORDER, by 12/31/14, Plaintiff shall file an supplement to the complaint properly alleging federal subject matter jurisdiction, or this case will be dismissed without prejudice for lack of federal subject matter jurisdiction. Signed by Senior Judge James A Teilborg on 12/18/14. (REW) |
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the Arizona District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.