Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

LUCIDO v. NESTLE PURINA PET CARE COMPANY, 15-cv-00569-EMC. (2016)

Court: District Court, N.D. California Number: infdco20160607944 Visitors: 31
Filed: Jun. 06, 2016
Latest Update: Jun. 06, 2016
Summary: ORDER RE PLAINTIFFS' LETTER OF JUNE 3, 2016 Docket No. 99. EDWARD M. CHEN , District Judge . The Court has reviewed the letter from Plaintiffs, dated June 3, 2016. Based on that letter, the Court hereby rules as follows. 1. Ms. Phillips, Mr. Carlson, and Ms. Kimball shall have until July 29, 2016, to make a decision as to whether they will pursue individual claims for recovery of losses in terms of reimbursement of medical or burial expenses, value of lost pets, etc. 2. Plaintiffs shall
More

ORDER RE PLAINTIFFS' LETTER OF JUNE 3, 2016

Docket No. 99.

The Court has reviewed the letter from Plaintiffs, dated June 3, 2016. Based on that letter, the Court hereby rules as follows.

1. Ms. Phillips, Mr. Carlson, and Ms. Kimball shall have until July 29, 2016, to make a decision as to whether they will pursue individual claims for recovery of losses in terms of reimbursement of medical or burial expenses, value of lost pets, etc.

2. Plaintiffs shall have until July 29, 2016, to file an amended complaint. The amendment is permitted solely to reflect Plaintiffs' decision not to pursue individual claims for recovery of losses in terms of reimbursement of medical or burial expenses, value of lost pets, etc. If any of the three individuals identified above still elect to pursue such recovery, that should also be reflected in the amended complaint.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Source:  Leagle

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer