Scott Wood Products, LLC v. Multitrade Rabun Gap, LLC
||Scott Wood Products, LLC
||Multitrade Rabun Gap, LLC
||January 4, 2010
||US District Court for the Middle District of Alabama
||Mark E. Fuller
||Susan Russ Walker
|Nature of Suit:
|Cause of Action:
||28:1332 Diversity-Breach of Contract
|Jury Demanded By:
Access additional case information on PACER
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
|February 18, 2010
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER as follows: (1) Defendants 9 Motion to Dismiss, or, in the Alternative, to Transfer is DENIED to the extent that it seeks dismissal of this action, but GRANTED to the extent that it seeks transfer of this lawsuit to the United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia, Gainesville Division; and (2) It is further ORDERED that this action be, and the same hereby is TRANSFERRED to the United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia, Gainesville Division for all further proceedings. Signed by Hon. Chief Judge Mark E. Fuller on 2/18/2010. (cb, )
|January 8, 2010
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDERED as follows: (1) Plaintiff is DIRECTED to file an Amended Complaint which clearly sets forth the factual and legal basis for this Court's subject matter jurisdiction by no later than 2/1/2010 as further set out; and (2) If plaintiff concedes that this Court does not have subject matter jurisdiction over this action, Plaintiff is DIRECTED to file a proper motion pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(2) seeking dismissal of this action without prejudice by no later than February 1, 2010. Signed by Hon. Chief Judge Mark E. Fuller on 1/8/2010. (cb, )
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 Alabama Middle District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
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.
Why Is My Information Online?