Excedis Corporation vs Edward Bollmann, et al
Filing
137
AMENDED ORDER that the Court's prior Order ECF No. 120 is amended to reflect that Excedis' Complaint ECF No. 1 , Ex. 1 is DISMISSED without prejudice and Excedis' Answer ECF No. 22 is STRICKEN; Bollamn-Kerr counterclaim ECF No. 7 has not been stricken; Clerk is directed to amend the docket accordingly. Signed by Judge Howard D. McKibben on 10/24/2018. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - KW)
1
2
3
4
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
5
DISTRICT OF NEVADA
6
***
7
8
9
EXCEDIS CORPORATION, a Nevada Case No. 3:16-cv-00514-HDM-WGC
limited liability company,
AMENDED ORDER
Plaintiff,
v.
10
11
EDWARD BOLLMAN, an individual,
JAMES KERR, an individual, et al.,
12
Defendants.
13
On August 6, 2018, this Court issued an order accepting the Report and
14
Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Cobb.
(See ECF No. 120).
The Court
15
inadvertently referenced the incorrect docket numbers in the prior order. Therefore, the
16
17
Court’s prior order is amended to reflect that Excedis’ complaint (ECF No. 1, Ex. 1) is
DISMISSED without prejudice and Excedis’ answer to the Bollman-Kerr counterclaim
18
(ECF No. 22) is STRICKEN. The Bollman-Kerr counterclaim (ECF No. 7) has not been
19
stricken and the Clerk of the Court is directed to amend the docket accordingly. This
20
order corrects a clerical error only and is therefore not subject to the automatic stay of the
21
United States Bankruptcy Court.
22
IT IS SO ORDERED.
23
24
DATED THIS 24th day of October, 2018.
25
26
27
HOWARD D. MCKIBBEN,
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
28
1
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?