Jewell Coke Co., Lp v. Arcelormittal USA, Inc.
District Court, N.D. Ohio
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION & ORDER [Resolving Doc. No. 28]
JAMES S. GWIN, District Judge:
In this contract dispute, Plaintiff and Counter-Defendant Jewell Coke Company (“Jewell”) moves the Court to dismiss the counter-claim filed by the Defendant and Counter-Claimant, ArcelorMittal USA, Inc. (“ArcelorMittal USA”) under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. [Doc. 28-1.] ArcelorMittal USA opposes the motion. [Doc. 94.] Jewell has replied. [Doc. 114.]
For the following reasons, the Court DENIES Jewell’s motion to dismiss.
I. Background
In this contract…
2Cases cited23 opinions
- Ashcroft v. IqbalSupreme Court of the United States · 2009
- Bell Atlantic Corp. v. TwomblySupreme Court of the United States · 2007
- Conley v. GibsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1957
- Lama Holding Co. v. Smith Barney Inc.New York Court of Appeals · 1996
- Stanley Cohen, Gerald A. Garfinkle, Eastern Artists and Drafting Materials, Inc. v. Elliott Koenig, and Robert KoenigCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1994
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Roof Maxx Technologies LLC v. HolsingerDistrict Court, S.D. Ohio · 2021
- Roof Maxx Technologies LLC v. RourkDistrict Court, S.D. Ohio · 2021
- Roof Maxx Technologies LLC v. TabbertDistrict Court, S.D. Ohio · 2021