Skip to content.
About GPO   |   Newsroom/Media   |   Congressional Relations   |   Inspector General   |   Careers   |   Contact   |   askGPO   |   Help  

  FDsys > More Information
(Search string is required)

16-1274 - INDYCAR LLC v. BOSTON GRAND PRIX, et al.

Download Files


Document in Context
16-1274 - INDYCAR LLC v. BOSTON GRAND PRIX, et al.
June 1, 2016
PDF | More
ENTRY ON JURISDICTION - On May 23, 2016, Plaintiff, Indy Car, LLC, filed a Complaint. (Filing No. 1.) However, the Complaint fails to allege all of the facts necessary to determine whether this Court has subject matter jurisdiction over this case. The Complaint alleges that the Court has jurisdiction based upon diversity of citizenship. Nevertheless, the Complaint fails to sufficiently allege the citizenship of the parties. Citizenship is the operative consideration for jurisdictional purposes. See Meyerson v. Harrah's E. Chi. Casino, 299 F.3d 616, 617 (7th Cir. 2002). In particular, the Complaint does not sufficiently identify the members of Indy Car, LLC or Boston Grand Prix, LLC; and the Complaint does not adequately allege their citizenship. To remedy this error, this Court ORDERS the Plaintiff to file a supplemental jurisdictional statement to sufficiently establish this Court's jurisdiction over this case. The Plaintiff's statement must accurately identify the members of Indy Car, LLC and Boston Grand Prix, LLC and articulate their citizenship. The Plaintiff's supplemental jurisdictional statement is due 14 days after the date of this entry. Signed by Judge Tanya Walton Pratt on 6/1/2016.(JLS)
June 20, 2016
PDF | More
ENTRY OF JURISDICTION - As such, this Court GRANTS the Plaintiff's request for limited discovery to determine the members of the Defendant, Boston Grand Prix, LLC, and to identify their citizenship for purposes of jurisdiction. The Plaintiffs are ORDERED to file a supplemental jurisdictional statement, identifying the members of the Defendant LLC and alleging their citizenship within 30 days after the date of this entry. *See order. Signed by Judge Tanya Walton Pratt on 6/20/2016.(JLS) Modified on 6/21/2016 (JLS).
September 20, 2016
PDF | More
to timely file objections within fourteen days after service shall constitute a waiver of subsequent review absent a showing of good cause for such failure. Signed by Magistrate Judge Mark J. Dinsmore on 9/20/2016.(MAC)REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS re 49 MOTION to Dismiss Plaintiff IndyCar, LLC's First Amended Complaint, or in the Alternative, to Stay this Action During the Pendency of Boston Grand Prix, LLC's Bankruptcy Proceedings filed by JOHN CASEY. While the Boston Verizon IndyCar Series event may have been red flagged, Casey has not demonstrated that the same should happen to INDYCAR's lawsuit. Accordingly, the Magistrate Judge recommends that Casey's motion to dismiss or stay this proceeding, [Dkt. 49], be DENIED. Any objections to the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation must be filed with the Clerk in accordance with 28 U.S.C. ยง 636(b)(1) and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(b), and failure
January 4, 2017
PDF | More
ENTRY OVERRULING DEFENDANT'S OBJECTION AND ADOPTING MAGISTRATE JUDGE'S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION - For the foregoing reasons, the Report and Recommendation is ADOPTED, and the Defendant's objection is OVERRULED. (See Entry.) Signed by Judge Tanya Walton Pratt on 1/4/2017.(JLS)
December 20, 2017
PDF | More
ENTRY - 120 Motion for Summary Judgment is granted on its breach of contract and fraud claims. The Court will set this matter for a damages hearing in a separate entry. Signed by Judge Tanya Walton Pratt on 12/20/2017. (Copy mailed to Defendant) (MEJ)