Datatreasury Corporation v. Wells Fargo & Company et al

Filing 526

RESPONSE to Motion re #83 MOTION to Dismiss Plaintiff's Complaint Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(2) and Brief in Support Thereof Plaintiff's Amended Response to Defendant UnionBanCal's Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Personal Jurisdiction Under Rule 12b2 filed by Datatreasury Corporation. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A#2 Exhibit B#3 Exhibit C#4 Exhibit D#5 Exhibit E#6 Exhibit F#7 Exhibit G#8 Exhibit H#9 Exhibit I#10 Exhibit J#11 Exhibit K#12 Exhibit L#13 Text of Proposed Order)(King, Richard)

Datatreasury Corporation v. Wells Fargo & Company et al

Doc. 526 Att. 13

Case 2:06-cv-00072-DF-CMC

Document 526

Filed 02/16/2007

Page 1 of 1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS MARSHALL DIVISION DATATREASURY CORPORATION Plaintiff v. WELLS FARGO & COMPANY, et al. Defendants § § § § § § §

Civil Action No. 2:06-CV-72 Judge David Folsom

ORDER

Before the Court is DataTreasury's Amended Response to UnionBanCal Corporation's Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Personal Jurisdiction Under Rule 12(b)(2). Having considered UnionBanCal Corporation's Motion and the responses thereto, the Court is of the opinion that it should be DENIED. IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dockets.Justia.com