MARTIN v. TARGET CORPORATION, 2:14-cv-470-FtM-38CM. (2015)
Court: District Court, M.D. Florida
Number: infdco20150818756
Visitors: 10
Filed: Aug. 17, 2015
Latest Update: Aug. 17, 2015
Summary: ORDER 1 SHERI POLSTER CHAPPELL , District Judge . This matter comes before the Court on review of the docket. On June 12, 2015, the Court entered an Order ( Doc. #28 ) administratively closing this case for a period of sixty days. That time has now expired and no stipulated form of final order or judgment has been submitted. Accordingly, it is now ORDERED: The Clerk shall enter judgment dismissing the case with prejudice and close the file. DONE and ORDERED . FootNotes 1. Discl
Summary: ORDER 1 SHERI POLSTER CHAPPELL , District Judge . This matter comes before the Court on review of the docket. On June 12, 2015, the Court entered an Order ( Doc. #28 ) administratively closing this case for a period of sixty days. That time has now expired and no stipulated form of final order or judgment has been submitted. Accordingly, it is now ORDERED: The Clerk shall enter judgment dismissing the case with prejudice and close the file. DONE and ORDERED . FootNotes 1. Discla..
More
ORDER1
SHERI POLSTER CHAPPELL, District Judge.
This matter comes before the Court on review of the docket. On June 12, 2015, the Court entered an Order (Doc. #28) administratively closing this case for a period of sixty days. That time has now expired and no stipulated form of final order or judgment has been submitted.
Accordingly, it is now ORDERED:
The Clerk shall enter judgment dismissing the case with prejudice and close the file.
DONE and ORDERED.
FootNotes
1. Disclaimer: Documents filed in CM/ECF may contain hyperlinks to other documents or websites. These hyperlinks are provided only for users' convenience. Users are cautioned that hyperlinked documents in CM/ECF are subject to PACER fees. By allowing hyperlinks to other websites, this Court does not endorse, recommend, approve, or guarantee any third parties or the services or products they provide on their websites. Likewise, the Court has no agreements with any of these third parties or their websites. The Court accepts no responsibility for the availability or functionality of any hyperlink. Thus, the fact that a hyperlink ceases to work or directs the user to some other site does not affect the opinion of the Court.
Source: Leagle
