MISHRA v. TANDON et al
| ANURAG MISHRA |
| BHASKAR BANDYOPADHYAY, JITENDRA SOLANKI, ARUN PATEL, SHYAM SINGH, INDIA ASSOCIATION OF GREATER ROCKFORD, N. GOPALA RAO, LAXMI C. TANDON, VEENA TANDON, KUMUD NIGAM and SANJEEV KUMAR |
| 3:2012cv50390 |
| October 25, 2012 |
| US District Court for the Northern District of Illinois |
| Rockford Office |
| Winnebago |
| Frederick J. Kapala |
| P. Michael Mahoney |
| P.I.: Other |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1332 Diversity-Tort/Non-Motor Vehicle |
| Plaintiff |
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
37
WRITTEN Opinion entered by the Honorable Frederick J. Kapala on 3/8/2013: Defendant Singhs' motion to strike and/or dismiss pursuant to FRCP 10(b) and 12(f) 8 is granted in part and denied in part. Defendants Laxmi Tandon and Veena Tando n's motions to dismiss and/or strike, and for more definite statement 10 13 are granted in part and denied in part. The remaining defendants' motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim 17 is denied in part and granted in part. Plai ntiff's motion to accept his late-filed response 22 to all of the above motions is granted. The complaint is dismissed without prejudice to being refiled in compliance with this order by April 5, 2013. Failure to file by that date may result in dismissal for failure to prosecute. [For further details see order.] Electronic notice(jat, )
|
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 Illinois Northern 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.
