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

  FDsys > More Information
(Search string is required)

06-2376 - Wong et al. v. Partygaming LTD et al.

Download Files


Document in Context
06-2376 - Wong et al. v. Partygaming LTD et al.
March 19, 2007
PDF | More
Memorandum and Order granting in part Representatives' (plaintiffs') unopposed motion for class certification, provisionally certifying the class defined, and defining the class claims and appointing class counsel as described. The Court also directs plaintiffs to file an amended complaint, encompassing the defined class and addressing subject matter jurisdiction over the defined class, as well as the proposed method of notice to class members by 3/30/2007. (Related Doc # 6). Signed by Judge Ann Aldrich on 3/19/2007.(B,B)
May 6, 2008
PDF | More
Memorandum and Order denying Plaintiffs' Motions for default judgment and for damages and granting PartyGaming's motion to set aside the entry of default (Related doc 12, 14, 15). The court notes, however, that plaintiffs' first amended complaint does not adequately address questions of subject matter jurisdiction, and that plaintiffs' second amended complaint raises questions of venue. Further, the court observes the second amended complaint, as filed, replaces the first amended complaint resulting in a single class that includes 23 states, none of which is Ohio. Accordingly, plaintiffs are ordered to file a fourth amended complaint addressing these issues by 5/23/2008. PartyGaming must serve its answer or otherwise present a motion pursuant to Rule 12, within 20 days of being served with the fourth amended complaint. In light of this schedule, responsive briefing on plaintiffs' second motion for class certification is stayed pending resolution of venue and jurisdictional issues. Signed by Judge Ann Aldrich on 5/6/2008.(B,B) Modified text on 5/7/2008 (B,B).
September 30, 2008
PDF | More
Memorandum and Order (Related Doc # 33)that this court denies defendants motion to dismiss for improper venue and for failure to state a claim as moot and dismisses the action under the doctrine of forum non conveniens. Judge Ann Aldrich on 9-30-08.(K,V)