GONZALEZ-MCCAULLEY INVESTMENT GROUP, INC v. USA
| GONZALEZ-MCCAULLEY INVESTMENT GROUP, INC |
| USA |
| 1:2009cv00641 |
| September 29, 2009 |
| United States Federal Claims Court |
| COFC Office |
| None |
| Edward J. Damich |
| Robert H. Hodges |
| Other |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1491 |
| None |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
21
UNPUBLISHED OPINION and ORDER granting 20 Defendant's Motion to Dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, pursuant to RCFC 12(b)(1). The Clerk is directed to enter judgment, dismissing the complaint without prejudice. Signed by Judge Edward J. Damich. (jsb)
|
|
Filing
14
ORDER denying 10 Defendant's Motion to Dismiss and allowing Plaintiff leave to file an amended complaint on or before September 3, 2010. Signed by Judge Edward J. Damich. (jsb)
|
| Search for this case: GONZALEZ-MCCAULLEY INVESTMENT GROUP, INC v. USA | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Plaintiff: GONZALEZ-MCCAULLEY INVESTMENT GROUP, INC | |
| Represented By: | Mark Saul Schondorf |
| 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 ] |
| Defendant: USA | |
| Represented By: | Steven Jay Abelson |
| 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.
