Filed: Nov. 30, 2015
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit _ No. 15-1444 _ Quality Resources, Inc. lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellant v. Pfizer, Inc. lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant - Appellee _ Appeal from United States District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri - St. Louis _ Submitted: November 27, 2016 Filed: November 30, 2015 [Unpublished] _ Before LOKEN, BOWMAN, and COLLOTON, Circuit Judges. _ PER CURIAM. Quality Resources, Inc., appeals the district court’s1 Federal Rule of Ci
Summary: United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit _ No. 15-1444 _ Quality Resources, Inc. lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellant v. Pfizer, Inc. lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant - Appellee _ Appeal from United States District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri - St. Louis _ Submitted: November 27, 2016 Filed: November 30, 2015 [Unpublished] _ Before LOKEN, BOWMAN, and COLLOTON, Circuit Judges. _ PER CURIAM. Quality Resources, Inc., appeals the district court’s1 Federal Rule of Civ..
More
United States Court of Appeals
For the Eighth Circuit
___________________________
No. 15-1444
___________________________
Quality Resources, Inc.
lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellant
v.
Pfizer, Inc.
lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant - Appellee
____________
Appeal from United States District Court
for the Eastern District of Missouri - St. Louis
____________
Submitted: November 27, 2016
Filed: November 30, 2015
[Unpublished]
____________
Before LOKEN, BOWMAN, and COLLOTON, Circuit Judges.
____________
PER CURIAM.
Quality Resources, Inc., appeals the district court’s1 Federal Rule of Civil
Procedure 12(b)(6) dismissal of its diversity action claiming breach of contract and
1
The Honorable Carol E. Jackson, United States District Judge for the Eastern
District of Missouri.
tortious interference with contracts and business expectancies. Upon careful de novo
review of the record and consideration of the parties’ briefs, we conclude, for the
reasons explained by the district court, that the complaint failed to state a claim. See
Rochling v. Dep’t of Veterans Affairs,
725 F.3d 927, 930 (8th Cir. 2013) (de novo
review). Accordingly, the judgment of the district court is affirmed. See 8th Cir. R.
47B.
______________________________
-2-