Orr v. Nevada State Board of Osteopathic Medicine, 2:12-cv-2119-GMN-VCF. (2016)
Court: District Court, D. Nevada
Number: infdco20161229c10
Visitors: 12
Filed: Dec. 02, 2016
Latest Update: Dec. 02, 2016
Summary: FootNotes 1. This court has reviewed the challenged phrases in the context of the court's September 13 order. It has difficulty finding the complained of ambiguity. To the contrary, the September 13 order clearly and efficiently denied Orr's motion for summary judgment and dismissed her claims against the individual defendants on qualified immunity grounds. (ECF No. 20). 2. At the time the court considered the Board's first motion to dismiss, Orr had changed her requested relief, specific le
Summary: FootNotes 1. This court has reviewed the challenged phrases in the context of the court's September 13 order. It has difficulty finding the complained of ambiguity. To the contrary, the September 13 order clearly and efficiently denied Orr's motion for summary judgment and dismissed her claims against the individual defendants on qualified immunity grounds. (ECF No. 20). 2. At the time the court considered the Board's first motion to dismiss, Orr had changed her requested relief, specific leg..
More
FootNotes
1. This court has reviewed the challenged phrases in the context of the court's September 13 order. It has difficulty finding the complained of ambiguity. To the contrary, the September 13 order clearly and efficiently denied Orr's motion for summary judgment and dismissed her claims against the individual defendants on qualified immunity grounds. (ECF No. 20).
2. At the time the court considered the Board's first motion to dismiss, Orr had changed her requested relief, specific legal theory of liability, and dismissed her state court action. (ECF No. 20) In light of these developments, the court declined to address Orr's claims against the Board on the merits and gave Orr an opportunity to amend her claims. (Id.)
Source: Leagle
