OSSIM et al v. ANULEX TECHNOLOGIES, INC. et al
| JOHN OSSIM and KRISTEN OSSIM |
| JOHN DOE, M.D., ANULEX TECHNOLOGIES, INC. and ABC INC. |
| 1:2014cv00254 |
| February 20, 2014 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of Indiana |
| Indianapolis Office |
| Denise K. LaRue |
| Tanya Walton Pratt |
| Personal Inj. Prod. Liability |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1332 Diversity-Product Liability |
| 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
40
ENTRY on Defendants Motion to Dismiss - Anulex's Motion to Dismiss (Filing No. 6 ) is DENIED. Signed by Judge Tanya Walton Pratt on 9/30/2014. (TRG)
|
|
Filing
35
ENTRY on Plaintiffs' Motion for Leave - the Plaintiffs' Motion for Leave to File Documents Identifying Defendants ABC, Inc. and John Doe, MD, under Seal (Filing No. 26 ) is DENIED. Accordingly, Filing No. 34 , the proposed exhibit file d under seal, is stricken. The Plaintiffs' response to the pending motion to dismiss is due no later than September 23, 2014. Defendants' reply (if any) is due no later than September 29, 2014. Signed by Judge Tanya Walton Pratt on 9/9/2014. (TRG)
|
|
Filing
22
ORDER denying without prejudice 12 Motion to remand. Consistent with the Court's order of 3/12/2014, the Ossims shall have 30 days from the date of this Entry to file their response in opposition to Anulex's motion to dismiss. Signed by Judge Tanya Walton Pratt on 6/24/2014. (CBU)
|
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 Indiana Southern 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.
