BRAUD v. WAL-MART STORES, INC., 17-320-JWD-EWD. (2017)
Court: District Court, M.D. Louisiana
Number: infdco20171102g50
Visitors: 3
Filed: Nov. 01, 2017
Latest Update: Nov. 01, 2017
Summary: OPINION JOHN W. DeGRAVELLES , District Judge . After independently reviewing the entire record in this case and for reasons set forth in the Magistrate Judge's Report dated October 6, 2017, to which no objection was filed: IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiff's claims against defendants Wal-Mart Store No. 0485 and Lance Doe are dismissed without prejudice pursuant to Local Civil Rule 41(b)(3). IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff will be allowed to file a motion for reinstatement of the action
Summary: OPINION JOHN W. DeGRAVELLES , District Judge . After independently reviewing the entire record in this case and for reasons set forth in the Magistrate Judge's Report dated October 6, 2017, to which no objection was filed: IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiff's claims against defendants Wal-Mart Store No. 0485 and Lance Doe are dismissed without prejudice pursuant to Local Civil Rule 41(b)(3). IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff will be allowed to file a motion for reinstatement of the action ..
More
OPINION
JOHN W. DeGRAVELLES, District Judge.
After independently reviewing the entire record in this case and for reasons set forth in the Magistrate Judge's Report dated October 6, 2017, to which no objection was filed:
IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiff's claims against defendants Wal-Mart Store No. 0485 and Lance Doe are dismissed without prejudice pursuant to Local Civil Rule 41(b)(3).
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff will be allowed to file a motion for reinstatement of the action against defendants Wal-Mart Store No. 0485 and Lance Doe within thirty days for good cause shown.
Source: Leagle
