Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

KEE v. ZIMMER, INC., 11-7789. (2012)

Court: District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania Number: infdco20120518949 Visitors: 21
Filed: May 17, 2012
Latest Update: May 17, 2012
Summary: ORDER EDUARDO C. ROBRENO, Judge. AND NOW, this 17th day of May, 2012, for the reasons set forth in the accompanying Memorandum Opinion, it is hereby ORDERED that Defendant's Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 6) is GRANTED and Counts I, II, III, IV, V, VI, VII, and IX are DISMISSED with leave to amend. 1 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendant's Motion for Leave to Reply (ECF No. 8) is GRANTED. 2 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, in the event Plaintiff does not file an amended complaint, co
More

ORDER

EDUARDO C. ROBRENO, Judge.

AND NOW, this 17th day of May, 2012, for the reasons set forth in the accompanying Memorandum Opinion, it is hereby ORDERED that Defendant's Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 6) is GRANTED and Counts I, II, III, IV, V, VI, VII, and IX are DISMISSED with leave to amend.1

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendant's Motion for Leave to Reply (ECF No. 8) is GRANTED.2

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, in the event Plaintiff does not file an amended complaint, counsel for the parties shall conduct a conference pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(f) and submit to the Court a written report outlining their proposed discovery plan by June 10, 2012.3

AND IT IS SO ORDERED.

FootNotes


1. If appropriate, Plaintiff may amend the Complaint consistent with the Memorandum Opinion by May 28, 2012.
2. The Court considered the substance of the Reply Memorandum in disposing of the Motion to Dismiss.
3. If Plaintiff files an amended complaint, the parties are temporarily excused from the provisions of Rule 26(f) until further order of the Court.
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