Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

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

PROKOP v. DENMAN

United States District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania


December 29, 2005.

JOHN PROKOP, Plaintiff
v.
JAMES A. DENMAN, et al., Defendants.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: DONETTA AMBROSE, District Judge

MEMORANDUM ORDER

On January 18, 2005, this case was referred to United States Magistrate Judge Ila Jeanne Sensenich for pretrial proceedings in accordance with the Magistrates Act, 28 U.S.C. ยงยง 636 (b) (1) (A) and (B), and Rules 71.1.3 and 72.1.4 of the Local Rules for Magistrates.

The magistrate judge's report and recommendation, filed on December 2, 2005, recommended that the Rule 12 (b) (1) motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction filed by Defendants be granted. The parties were allowed ten (10) days from the date of service to file objections. Service was made on all parties. Objections to the report and recommendation were filed by Plaintiff on December 16, 2005. After de novo review of the pleadings and documents in the case, together with the report and recommendation and objections thereto, the following order is entered: AND NOW, this 29th day of December, 2005;

  IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Rule 12 (b) (1) motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction filed by Defendants is granted.

  IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Motion to Expedite and the Motion to Confirm Arbitration Award filed by Defendants (Document No. 9) are dismissed as moot.

  The report and recommendation of Magistrate Judge Sensenich, dated December 2, 2005, is adopted as the opinion of the court.

20051229

© 1992-2006 VersusLaw Inc.



Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

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