IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
August 2, 2010
ARTHUR ALAN WOLK, ESQUIRE
WALTER K. OLSON, ET AL.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Mary A. McLAUGHLIN, J.
AND NOW, this 2nd day of August, 2010, upon consideration of the Defendants' Motion to Dismiss Pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6) (Docket No. 5), the plaintiff's opposition, the defendants' reply thereto, the Supplemental Brief in Support of Defendants' Motion to Dismiss Pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6), the Plaintiff's Sur-Reply in Opposition to the Motion to Dismiss Pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6) of Defendants, and after oral arguments held on June 24, 2010,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that, for the reasons stated in a Memorandum of today's date, the defendants' Motion to Dismiss is GRANTED.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the defendants' Motion for a Protective Order to Stay Discovery Pursuant to Rule 26(c) (Docket No. 7) is DENIED as moot.
This case is closed.
© 1992-2010 VersusLaw Inc.