AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Motions
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Motions
Judges

NANCY HAMMER, Plaintiff, v. CARDIO MEDICAL PRODUCTS, INC., Defendant.

ORDER

WILLIAM STANDISH, Senior District Judge

AND NOW, this 11th day of January, 2006, after the plaintiff filed an action in the above-captioned case, and after the defendant moved to dismiss the complaint for failure to prosecute, and after a Report and Recommendation was issued by the United States Magistrate Judge, and the parties were granted ten days after being served with a copy to file written objections thereto, and upon consideration of the objections filed by the plaintiff, as well as the defendant's response to those objections, and after independent review of the pleadings, and the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation, which is adopted as the opinion of this Court,

IT IS ORDERED that the defendant's motion to dismiss the complaint for failure to prosecute (Docket No. 92) is granted.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that pursuant to Rule 4(a)(1) of the F.R.App.P., if the plaintiff desires to appeal from this Order, she must do so within thirty (30) days by filing a notice of appeal as provided by Rule 3 F.R.App.P.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

HAMMER v. CARDIO MEDICAL PRODUCTS, INC. (W.D.Pa. 2006)
(Jan 11, 2006)