Carl L. Jimena v. Clive Standish, et al

Filing 159

ORDER Denying In Part And Granting In Part Plaintiff's Amended Motion To Admit Third Amended Complaint, Striking Allegations Against UBS FS, And Directing Clerk Of Court To File Third Amended Complaint (Doc. 144 ), signed by Judge Oliver W. Wanger on 10/13/2009. (Scrivner, E)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 ORDER 07-CV-00367-OWW-TAG UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA FRESNO DIVISION CARL L. JIMENA, Plaintiff, vs. UBS AG BANK, INC., SWITZERLAND HEADQUARTERS; UBS AG BANK, INC., MANHATTAN, NEW YORK BRANCH; UBS FINANCIAL SERVICES, INC., BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA BRANCH; UBS FINANCIAL SERVICES, INC., WEEHAWKEN, NEW JERSEY BRANCH; and CLIVE STANDISH, Defendants. CASE NO. 07-CV-00367-OWW-TAG ORDER DENYING IN PART AND GRANTING IN PART PLAINTIFF'S AMENDED MOTION TO ADMIT THIRD AMENDED COMPLAINT, STRIKING ALLEGATIONS AGAINST UBS FS, AND DIRECTING CLERK OF COURT TO FILE THIRD AMENDED COMPLAINT (DOC. 144) Honorable Oliver W. Wanger Courtroom: 3 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 ORDER 07-CV-00367-OWW-TAG ORDER For the reasons stated in the Court's Memorandum Decision and Order Granting in Part and Denying in Part Plaintiff's Amended Motion to Admit Third Amended Complaint, Striking Allegations Against UBS FS, and Directing Clerk of Court to File Third Amended Complaint, filed on October 6, 2009 (Docket No. 155), 1. 2. Plaintiff's motion to "admit" the proposed Third Amended The allegations in the proposed Third Amended Complaint as to Complaint is GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART; the alter ego, fraud and agency liability of UBS FS for the alleged actions of UBS AG are STRICKEN; 3. The Clerk of the Court shall file the proposed Third Amended Complaint. IT IS SO ORDERED DATED: October _13, 2009 /s/ OLIVER W. WANGER OLIVER W. WANGER District Court Judge

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?