Legal Opinion

Committe v. Miller Nash Graham & Dunn LLP

District Court, D. Oregon

Decided February 1, 2021No. 3:18-cv-01013Unknown

1Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON PORTLAND DIVISION BRUCE COMMITTE, Case No. 3:18-cv-01013-AA OPINION & ORDER Plaintiff, v. MILLER NASH GRAHAM & DUNN, LLP, and P.K. Runkles-Pearson, Defendants. _______________________________________ AIKEN, District Judge. This Court previously dismissed plaintiff’s complaint (doc. 2) for failure to sate a claim upon which relief could be granted pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B). Doc. 9. In light of his pro se status, the Court granted plaintiff the opportunity to amend his complaint.1 Plaintiff then moved for reconsideration…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Ashcroft v. IqbalSupreme Court of the United States · 2009
  2. Bell Atlantic Corp. v. TwomblySupreme Court of the United States · 2007
  3. Haines v. KernerSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
  4. Raymond Watison v. Mary CarterCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2012
  5. Mantia v. HansonCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2003

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API