Owens v. US Bank Corporation

Owens v. US Bank Corporation

Plaintiff:	Sheldon Owens
Defendant:	US Bank Corporation
Case Number:	0:2013cv00684
Filed:	March 25, 2013
Court:	US District Court for the District of Minnesota
County:	Hennepin
Presiding Judge:	Arthur J. Boylan
Presiding Judge:	John R. Tunheim
Nature of Suit:	Consumer Credit

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
July 3, 2013	Filing 20 ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS 19 . 1. Defendant U.S. Bank Corporation's Motion for Dismissal with prejudice and for Attorneys Fees and Costs [Docket No. 4] is granted in part and denied in part as further stated herein; 2. Def endant U.S. Bank Corporation's motion for dismissal pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6) is granted and the complaint is hereby dismissed without prejudice; and 3. Defendant U.S. Bank Corporation's motion for fees and costs is granted i n part and denied in part as provided herein. Defendant is awarded the $350 filing fee incurred in removing this case to federal court. Assessment of the $350 fee award is stayed, though such stay will be lifted, and payment of the awar d will be required, before plaintiff may proceed on any subsequent action against defendant U.S. Bank, based upon any mortgage account or banking relationship existing between the parties prior to the date of commencement of this case. (Written Opinion). Signed by Judge John R. Tunheim on July 3, 2013. (HAM) cc: Sheldon Owens. Modified on 7/3/2013 (lmb).

Date Filed

Document Text

July 3, 2013

Filing 20 ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS 19 . 1. Defendant U.S. Bank Corporation's Motion for Dismissal with prejudice and for Attorneys Fees and Costs [Docket No. 4] is granted in part and denied in part as further stated herein; 2. Def endant U.S. Bank Corporation's motion for dismissal pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6) is granted and the complaint is hereby dismissed without prejudice; and 3. Defendant U.S. Bank Corporation's motion for fees and costs is granted i n part and denied in part as provided herein. Defendant is awarded the $350 filing fee incurred in removing this case to federal court. Assessment of the $350 fee award is stayed, though such stay will be lifted, and payment of the awar d will be required, before plaintiff may proceed on any subsequent action against defendant U.S. Bank, based upon any mortgage account or banking relationship existing between the parties prior to the date of commencement of this case. (Written Opinion). Signed by Judge John R. Tunheim on July 3, 2013. (HAM) cc: Sheldon Owens. Modified on 7/3/2013 (lmb).

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: Owens v. US Bank Corporation
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Defendant: US Bank Corporation
Represented By:	Jonathan P Norrie
Represented By:	Michelle Kreidler Dove
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: Sheldon Owens
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?