INFINITE ENERGY INC v. ECONNERGY ENERGY COMPANY INC
ORDER GRANTING 352 MOTION to Amend/Correct Answer to Econnergy's Counterclaims. The word "that" is stricken from the final sentence of paragarph 81 of the 146 Answer to Counterclaim. Signed by CHIEF JUDGE STEPHAN P MICKLE on 11/15/2010. (jws)
-GRJ INFINITE ENERGY INC v. ECONNERGY ENERGY COMPANY INC
Page 1 of 2
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA GAINESVILLE DIVISION INFINITE ENERGY INC., A Florida corporation, Plaintiff, v. ECONNERGY ENERGY COMPANY, INC., A New York corporation, Defendant. ________________________________/ ORDER AMENDING ANSWER This cause comes before the Court upon Infinite Energy, Inc.'s Motion for Leave to Amend Answer to Econnergy's Counterclaims (doc. 352) and the response in opposition filed by Econnergy (doc. 378). The proposed amendment seeks to remove a single word, "that," from Infinite Energy's answer. Infinite Energy makes a plausible argument that it mistakenly worded its answer. Because amendments should be freely given under the Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(a), it is ORDERED AND ADJUDGED: 1. Infinite Energy, Inc.'s Motion for Leave to Amend Answer to CASE NO.: 1:06cv124-SPM/GRJ
Page 2 of 2
Econnergy's Counterclaims (doc. 352) is granted. 2. The word "that" is stricken from the final sentence of paragraph 81
of the Answer to Counterclaim (doc. 146). DONE AND ORDERED this 15th day of November, 2010.
s/ Stephan P. Mickle
Stephan P. Mickle Chief United States District Judge
CASE NO.: 1:06cv124-SPM/GRJ
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?