David Boyle v. Kathleen Sebelius
David Boyle |
Kathleen Sebelius |
2:2011cv07868 |
September 22, 2011 |
US District Court for the Central District of California |
Andrew J. Wistrich |
George H Wu |
Forfeit/Penalty: Other |
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
Document Text |
---|
Filing 28 MINUTE ORDER IN CHAMBERS by Judge George H Wu. The Court has received Plaintiff David Boyles Notice of Intent not to File Amended Complaint, filed on May 18, 2012. Pursuant to the Courts Ruling filed February 3, 2012, the above-entitled action is dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. (Case Terminated. Made JS-6.) (kti) |
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 California Central 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
Search for this case: David Boyle v. Kathleen Sebelius | |
---|---|
Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
Defendant: Kathleen Sebelius | |
Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
Search Finance | [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ] |
Search Web | [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
Plaintiff: David Boyle | |
Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
Search Finance | [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ] |
Search Web | [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
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.