Porghavami v. Aerolinea Prinicpal Chile S.A. et al
| Mehrdad Porghavami |
| Aerolinea Prinicpal Chile S.A., Group Musiet, Promati, Inc., Rolando Musiet Senior, Rolando Musiet Jr., Rolando Musiet Talguia, Fernando Musiet Talguia, Mauricio Muesit Talguia, Pier Musiet, et al and Does 1 to 100 |
| 1:2014cv06351 |
| July 22, 2014 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of New York |
| Foley Square Office |
| XX Out of State |
| Unassigned |
| Other Civil Rights |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1331 |
| 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
37
MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER Adopting 34 Report and Recommendation. Having reviewed the Report for clear error, this Court adopts the Report's recommendation in full. By order dated February 23, 2015, Magistrate Judge Peck sua sponte raised the issue of lack of diversity jurisdiction in this case. (ECF No. 31.) Because Plaintiff has not met the diversity jurisdiction requirements under 28 U.S.C. 1332(a), this Court must dismiss Plaintiff's Amended Complaint. The Clerk of the Court is directed to close the motion at ECF No. 25, and this case. SO ORDERED.Motions terminated: 25 SECOND MOTION to Dismiss the First Amended Complaint. filed by Pier Musiet, et al, Fernando Musiet Talguia, Aerolinea Prinicpal Chile S.A., Mauricio Muesit Talguia, Rolando Musiet Senior, Group Musiet, Promati, Inc., Rolando Musiet Jr., Rolando Musiet Talguia. (Signed by Judge George B. Daniels on 4/14/2015) (ama)
|
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 New York 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.
