Iyer v. Barney et al
| Ganesh Ramchandran Iyer |
| Morgan Stanley Smith Barney and Sally Ann Reagan |
| 4:2019cv00233 |
| January 22, 2019 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of Texas |
| Alfred H Bennett |
| Other Statutes: Administrative Procedures Act/Review or Appeal of Agency Decision |
| 09 U.S.C. ยง 0010 |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on February 26, 2019. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 6 Plaintiff's Notice of Dismissal Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure by Ganesh Ramchandran Iyer, filed.(SamanthaWarda, 4) |
Filing 5
ORDER granting #2 MOTION for Bal Travedi to Appear Pro Hac Vice (Signed by Judge Alfred H Bennett) Parties notified.(olindor, 4)
|
| Filing 4 First MOTION to Dismiss #1 Complaint for Lack of Subject Matter Jurisdiction by Sally Ann Reagan, filed. Motion Docket Date 3/14/2019. (Attachments: #1 Proposed Order)(Ebaugh, Nelson) |
| Filing 3 MOTION to Dismiss For Lack of Subject Matter Jurisdiction by Morgan Stanley Smith Barney, filed. Motion Docket Date 3/14/2019. (Attachments: #1 Proposed Order)(Harvin, Andrew) |
| Filing 2 MOTION for Bal Trivedi to Appear Pro Hac Vice by Ganesh Ramchandran Iyer, filed. Motion Docket Date 2/12/2019. (olindor, 4) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT against All Defendants filed by Ganesh Ramchandran Iyer. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet #2 Exhibit) (olindor, 4). |
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 Texas 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.
