Sheptin v. SmarteCarte Inc.

Sheptin v. SmarteCarte Inc.

Plaintiff:	Louis C Sheptin
Defendant:	SmarteCarte Inc.
Case Number:	0:2008cv05877
Filed:	October 30, 2008
Court:	US District Court for the District of Minnesota
Office:	DMN Office
County:	XX US, Outside State
Presiding Judge:	Boylan
Presiding Judge:	Montgomery
Nature of Suit:	P.I.: Other
Cause of Action:	28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Personal Injury
Jury Demanded By:	None

Follow case documents by RSS

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed	Document Text
February 20, 2009	Filing 21 MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Adopting 16 Report and Recommendation, Plaintiff's Objection 17 is OVERRULED; denying 19 Plaintiff's Motion for Sanctions; the Complaint is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE subject to the limitations in the R&R (Written Opinion). Signed by Judge Ann D. Montgomery on 2/20/2009. (TLU)
January 26, 2009	Filing 16 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION that this action be dismissed without prejudice ongrounds that the action was commenced in bad faith as evidenced by plaintiff Louis Sheptin's failure to submit a pretrial report and to appear at pretrial hearing pursua nt to Order issued by the court; and plaintiff's failure to advise the court and counsel that he would not appear at the pretrial conference, or to provide good cause for such failure to appear. Plaintiff should not be permitted to seek reopenin g of this case, or to file any other action based upon the factual circumstances alleged to be the basis for this case, except upon pre-payment of $750 attorneys' fees to defendant SmarteCarte Corporation. Objections to R&R due by 2/9/2009. Signed by Magistrate Judge Arthur J. Boylan on 1/26/09. (jam)

Date Filed

Document Text

February 20, 2009

Filing 21 MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Adopting 16 Report and Recommendation, Plaintiff's Objection 17 is OVERRULED; denying 19 Plaintiff's Motion for Sanctions; the Complaint is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE subject to the limitations in the R&R (Written Opinion). Signed by Judge Ann D. Montgomery on 2/20/2009. (TLU)

January 26, 2009

Filing 16 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION that this action be dismissed without prejudice ongrounds that the action was commenced in bad faith as evidenced by plaintiff Louis Sheptin's failure to submit a pretrial report and to appear at pretrial hearing pursua nt to Order issued by the court; and plaintiff's failure to advise the court and counsel that he would not appear at the pretrial conference, or to provide good cause for such failure to appear. Plaintiff should not be permitted to seek reopenin g of this case, or to file any other action based upon the factual circumstances alleged to be the basis for this case, except upon pre-payment of $750 attorneys' fees to defendant SmarteCarte Corporation. Objections to R&R due by 2/9/2009. Signed by Magistrate Judge Arthur J. Boylan on 1/26/09. (jam)

Access additional case information on PACER

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 Minnesota District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Sheptin v. SmarteCarte Inc.
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Defendant: SmarteCarte Inc.
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: Louis C Sheptin
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.

Why Is My Information Online?