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

  FDsys > More Information
(Search string is required)
 

15-1100 - The Hospital Authority of Metropolitan Government of Nashville and Davidson county, Tennessee v. Momenta Pharmaceuticals, Inc. et al


Download Files

Metadata

Document in Context
15-1100 - The Hospital Authority of Metropolitan Government of Nashville and Davidson county, Tennessee v. Momenta Pharmaceuticals, Inc. et al
September 29, 2016
PDF | More
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION: The Magistrate Judge recommends that: (1) Defendants' Motion to Transfer Case to the District of Massachusetts (DE 58) be DENIED; (2) Defendants' Motion to Dismiss (DE 65) be DENIED; and (3) Defendant Momenta Pharmaceuticals, Inc.'s Motion to Dismiss or Transfer for Improper Venue (DE 62) be DENIED. Signed by Magistrate Judge Barbara D. Holmes on 9/29/2016. (DOCKET TEXT SUMMARY ONLY-ATTORNEYS MUST OPEN THE PDF AND READ THE ORDER.)(eh)
March 21, 2017
PDF | More
MEMORANDUM OPINION OF THE COURT. Signed by District Judge Waverly D. Crenshaw, Jr on 3/21/17. (DOCKET TEXT SUMMARY ONLY-ATTORNEYS MUST OPEN THE PDF AND READ THE ORDER.)(am)
March 21, 2017
PDF | More
ORDER: Defendants' Motions for Leave to File a Reply (Doc. Nos. 125-26) are hereby GRANTED. Based on the parties' briefing and a de novo review of the record, Sections I, II.A, II.B(2), II.B(3), and II.C of the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge (Doc. No. 114) are hereby ADOPTED. Defendants' joint Motion to Transfer (Doc. No. 58) and Defendant Momenta Pharmaceuticals, Inc.'s Motion to Dismiss or Transfer for Improper Venue (Doc. No. 62) are DENIED. For the reasons set forth in the accompanying Memorandum Opinion, Defendants' joint Motion to Dismiss (Doc. No. 65) is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. Plaintiff's claims for damages are DISMISSED. Plaintiff's claims for injunctive and declaratory relief remain pending. Signed by District Judge Waverly D. Crenshaw, Jr on 3/21/17. (am) Modified on 3/22/2017 (am).
December 14, 2017
PDF | More
al modification that Plaintiff specify the state laws under which it asserts its unjust enrichment claims. Plaintiff shall file this amended complaint within seven (7) days of the date of entry of this Order. Defendant shall have 28 days after the filing of the amended complaint to answer or otherwise respond Signed by Magistrate Judge Barbara D. Holmes on 12/14/17. (DOCKET TEXT SUMMARY ONLY-ATTORNEYS MUST OPEN THE PDF AND READ THE ORDER.)(afs) Modified on 12/15/2017 (afs).ORDER: Based on the foregoing, Plaintiff's motion for leave to file an amended complaint (DE 140) is GRANTED, with the additional allegations described in Plaintiff's notice filed on September 15, 2017 (DE 159), and the addition