United States of America v. Fifty Below Sales & Marketing, Inc.

Filing 35

ORDER re 34 Notice of Continuing Litigation and Request to Correct Docket filed by United States of America; the docket should be corrected to reflect that the Court should not have granted summary judgement 32 with respect to this case and the case should be reopened (Written Opinion). Signed by Judge Ann D Montgomery on 07/26/2006. (TLU)

Download PDF
United States of America v. Fifty Below Sales & Marketing, Inc. Doc. 35 Case 0:06-cv-01112-ADM-RLE Document 35 Filed 07/26/2006 Page 1 of 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA United States of America, Plaintiff, v. Fifty Below Sales & Marketing, Inc., a Minnesota Corporation, Defendant. ______________________________________________________________________________ Michael R. Pahl, Esq., Assistant United States Attorney, Washington, DC, on behalf of United States of America. ______________________________________________________________________________ On July 21, 2006, the United States of America ("United States") filed a Notice of Continuing Litigation and Request to Correct Docket ("Notice") [Docket No. 34]. In the Notice, the United States avers that summary judgment was erroneously granted and judgment was erroneously entered in this case. While summary judgment and judgment were appropriate in related civil cases 05-1380 and 06-1269, this case contains a separate, unresolved issue of whether a permanent injunction should be issued. The Court agrees. The docket should be corrected to reflect that the Court should not have granted summary judgment [Docket No. 32] with respect to this case. Also, judgment [Docket No. 33] should not be entered in this case. BY THE COURT: ORDER Civ. No. 06-1112 ADM/RLE s/Ann D. Montgomery ANN D. MONTGOMERY U.S. DISTRICT JUDGE Dated: July 26, 2006. Dockets.Justia.com

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?