Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Dotson v. BRP US

March 9, 2006

BRIAN DOTSON, PLAINTIFF,
v.
BRP US, INC., ET AL, DEFENDANTS.



The opinion of the court was delivered by: J. Phil Gilbert District Judge

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

Upon Motion of Plaintiff, Brian Dotson, for leave to file the Amended Complaint (Doc. 12), the Court GRANTS the motion (Doc. 12) but STRIKES the Amended Complaint (Doc. 13) on file because it does not comply with Local Rule 15.1, which requires that all new material be underlined. The Court further notes that the Amended Complaint does not sufficiently address the jurisdictional issues raised by the Court's order of January 13, 2006. The Amended Complaint fails to contain "a short and plain statement of the grounds upon which the court's jurisdiction depends," as required by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8(a)(1), and, to the extent that the basis for jurisdiction may be diversity, the Amended Complaint still fails to allege the state of incorporation of the defendants and fails to allege the principal place of business of defendant BPRUS, Inc. These deficiencies must be remedied before the Court can be assured that it has jurisdiction over this case.

Accordingly, the Court ORDERS that the plaintiff shall have up to and including March 24, 2006, to file an amended pleading that conforms with all applicable rules. If the amended pleading does not cure the aforementioned defects, the Court may dismiss this case for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.

20060309

© 1992-2006 VersusLaw ...

Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.