Legal Opinion
Boltes v. Entex
District Court, S.D. Texas
Decided October 25, 1994No. Civ. A. No. H-92-2171PublishedCited by 1 opinion
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
CRONE, United States Magistrate Judge.
I. Introduction.
Pending before the court is Defendant En-tex’s Motion to Dismiss (Docket Entry # 28). Entex seeks dismissal of this action for insufficiency of service of process under Fed. R.Civ.P. 12(b)(5). Plaintiff John C. Boltes (“Boltes”) filed no response to Entex’s motion. Therefore, the motion is deemed unopposed under Local Rule 6(E). Having reviewed the pending motion, the submissions of the parties, the pleadings, and the applicable law, this court is of the opinion that Entex’s motion should be granted.
II. Background.
On…
2Cases cited18 opinions
- Eric David Boudette v. John Barnette, Police Officer James Vaughn, Police OfficerCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1991
- Systems Signs Supplies, Jahurett Castrillon v. United States Department of Justice, Washington, D.C.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1990
- United States v. Bernard Jerry, and Edgar SaundersCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1973
- Winters v. Teledyne Movible Offshore, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1985
- Shihshu Walter Wei v. State of HawaiiCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1985
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- Boykin v. Marriott International, Inc. (In Re Boykin)United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Virginia · 2000