Gilmore et al v. Salazar et al
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
|Date Filed||#||Document Text|
|September 30, 2014
OPINION AND ORDER by Judge John E Dowdell ; administratively closing the case (terminates case) ; staying case; denying 56 Motion to Dismiss; granting 58 Motion to Stay; granting 60 Motion to Stay; denying 61 Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction (SAS, Chambers)
|December 29, 2010
OPINION AND ORDER by Chief Judge Claire V Eagan that the Court lacks subject matter jurisdiction over this case, and plaintiffs' claims are dismissed without prejudice. (Re: 2 Complaint ) (RGG, Chambers)
|September 21, 2010
OPINION AND ORDER by Chief Judge Claire V Eagan that the Federal Defendants' Motion to Dismiss and Memorandum in Support (Dkt. # 19) is granted, and plaintiffs' claims against Ken Salazar, Robert Impson, and Paul Yates are dismissed . Ken Salazar, Robert Impson, and Paul Yates are dismissed as parties to this case. ; terminating party Paul Yates, Robert K Impson and Ken Salazar ; setting/resetting deadline(s)/hearing(s): The remaining parties are directed to file simulta neous briefs within fourteen (14) days, or by October 5, 2010, of this Opinion and Order as to the existence of federal subject matter jurisdiction over plaintiffs' claims against the Estate and Bingham. ( Miscellaneous Deadline set for 10/5/2010); granting 19 Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction; finding as moot 24 Motion to Clarify; finding as moot 25 Motion to Alter Order/Judgment (Re: 2 Complaint ) (RGG, Chambers)
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 Oklahoma Northern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
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?