BONOMO v. NOVA FINANCIAL HOLDINGS, INC., 11-4762. (2012)
Court: District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania
Number: infdco20120615e10
Visitors: 3
Filed: Jun. 15, 2012
Latest Update: Jun. 15, 2012
Summary: ORDER GENE E.K. PRATTER, District Judge. AND NOW, this 14th day of June, 2012, upon consideration of Defendant NOVA Financial Holdings, Inc.'s Motion to Dismiss (Doc. No. 11), and Plaintiffs Anthony J. Bonomo and Mary Ellen Bonomo's response thereto (Doc. No. 12), as well as the representations of counsel at oral argument, it is hereby ORDERED that the Motion is GRANTED WITHOUT PREJUDICE to Plaintiffs to file an amended complaint for the reasons discussed in the accompanying Memorandum. If Pl
Summary: ORDER GENE E.K. PRATTER, District Judge. AND NOW, this 14th day of June, 2012, upon consideration of Defendant NOVA Financial Holdings, Inc.'s Motion to Dismiss (Doc. No. 11), and Plaintiffs Anthony J. Bonomo and Mary Ellen Bonomo's response thereto (Doc. No. 12), as well as the representations of counsel at oral argument, it is hereby ORDERED that the Motion is GRANTED WITHOUT PREJUDICE to Plaintiffs to file an amended complaint for the reasons discussed in the accompanying Memorandum. If Pla..
More
ORDER
GENE E.K. PRATTER, District Judge.
AND NOW, this 14th day of June, 2012, upon consideration of Defendant NOVA Financial Holdings, Inc.'s Motion to Dismiss (Doc. No. 11), and Plaintiffs Anthony J. Bonomo and Mary Ellen Bonomo's response thereto (Doc. No. 12), as well as the representations of counsel at oral argument, it is hereby ORDERED that the Motion is GRANTED WITHOUT PREJUDICE to Plaintiffs to file an amended complaint for the reasons discussed in the accompanying Memorandum. If Plaintiffs wish to avail themselves of the leave to file an amended complaint, they must do so within thirty (30) days of the date of this Order. If no amended complaint is filed within that time period, the Court will mark this case as closed for statistical purposes.
Source: Leagle
