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

  FDsys > More Information
(Search string is required)
 

17-1500 - KUMAR v. TATA CONSULTANCY SERVICES LIMITED


Download Files

Metadata

Document in Context
17-1500 - KUMAR v. TATA CONSULTANCY SERVICES LIMITED
January 16, 2018
PDF | More
ORDER - This matter is before the Court on Defendant Tata Consultancy Services Limited's ("Tata") Motion to Dismiss Complaint, or, in the Alternative, for Judicial Estoppel ("Motion to Dismiss"), [Filing No. 10], as well as its Motion to Strike, [Filing No. 23]. Tata argues that Plaintiff Mohit Kumar filed this action after the discharge of his personal debt in Chapter 7 bankruptcy, despite being aware of the legal claims at the time he filed for bankruptcy. Tata argues that the Bankruptcy Court has not formally closed Mr. Kumar's case, which means Kumar lacks standing to bring the legal claims, as they are still property of the bankruptcy estate. Tata argues in the alternative that Mr. Kumar should be judicially estopped from pursuing these claims because he purposefully withheld his claims from the bankruptcy estate. Finally, Tata moves to strike Mr. Kumar's Response to Defendant's Reply. [Filing No. 22.] For the reasons set forth in this Order, the Court denies both of Tata's motions. For the reasons stated herein, Tata's Motion to Dismiss Complaint, or, in the Alternative, for Judicial Estoppel, 10, and its Motion to Strike 23, are DENIED. (SEE ORDER). Signed by Judge Jane Magnus-Stinson on 1/16/2018. (APD)