IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
September 22, 2011
MARTIN GROSS, PLAINTIFF
R.T. REYNOLDS, ET AL., DEFENDANTS
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Lawrence F. Stengel, J.
AND NOW, this 22nd day of September, 2011, upon careful consideration of defendants' motions to dismiss (Document Nos. 36, 38, and 48), plaintiff's briefs in opposition to the motions to dismiss (Document Nos. 49 and 51), and defendant's reply brief (Document No. 52), IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
1. Defendants' motions to dismiss (Document Nos. 36 and 48) are GRANTED, the Court having declined to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over plaintiff's breach of contract claim asserted in Count Two of the Amended Complaint.
2. Defendants' motion to dismiss (Document No. 38) is DISMISSED as moot.
3. The Clerk of Court is directed to mark this case CLOSED.
BY THE COURT:
Lawrence F. Stengel
© 1992-2011 VersusLaw Inc.