Arthur v. Medtronic, Inc. et al
| Kathleen A. Arthur |
| Medtronic, Inc. and Medtronic Sofamor Danek USA, Inc. |
| 4:2014cv00052 |
| January 13, 2014 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri |
| St. Louis Office |
| St. Louis - County |
| Carol E. Jackson |
| Personal Injury: Health Care |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1332 |
| 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
52
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER: IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that defendants motion to dismiss plaintiffs first amended complaint pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 9(b) and 12(b)(6) [Doc. #39] is granted. Signed by District Judge Carol E. Jackson on 8/24/2015. (KMS)
|
|
Filing
29
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER - IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that defendants motion to dismiss [Doc. # 10 ] is granted in part. Counts I, II, III, IV, and VI of the complaint are dismissed for failure to state a claim. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the defendants motio n to dismiss is denied without prejudice as to Counts V and VII. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that plaintiff shall have 30 days in which to file a motion for leave to amend her complaint with respect to the claims asserted in Counts V and VII only. A copy of the proposed amended complaint must be attached to the motion as an exhibit. Defendants will have 14 days to file a response to any motion to amend. Signed by District Judge Carol E. Jackson on 8/11/14. (KJS)
|
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 Missouri Eastern 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.
