Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Kamlesh Banga v. Allstate Insurance Company and Does 1 Through 10 Inclusive

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA


October 24, 2012

KAMLESH BANGA, PLAINTIFF,
v.
ALLSTATE INSURANCE COMPANY AND DOES 1 THROUGH 10 INCLUSIVE, DEFENDANTS.

ORDER

This case, in which plaintiff is proceeding pro se, is before the undersigned pursuant to Eastern District of California Local Rule 302(c)(21). See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). On September 28, 2012, the assigned district judge dismissed with prejudice plaintiff's Sixth Amended Complaint to the extent it is based on her claim that the reporting of payments made on the fire claim was false. Dckt. No. 108 at 4. The district judge also returned the case to the undersigned for consideration of defendant's motion to dismiss plaintiff's claims that defendant falsely reported a fallen tree claim, and that defendant falsely reported that the fire claim was still open. Id. at 4-5. Specifically, the district judge stated that the findings and recommendations did not address plaintiff's allegations that defendant falsely reported to credit reporting agencies that "plaintiff's tree fell on neighbor's house," that "the said claim was still open," that at one point defendant falsely reported that the fire claim was still open, and that those alleged falsehoods were also the cause of her harm under all three of plaintiff's causes of action. Id. at 4(citing Pl.'s Sixth Am. Compl. ¶¶ 20, 22, 33, 39 and 47).

In light of the district judge's order, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. On or before November 7, 2012, defendant shall file a supplemental brief specifically addressing whether and why plaintiff's claims that defendant falsely reported a fallen tree claim and that defendant falsely reported that the fire claim was still open should be dismissed.

2. On or before November 21, 2012, plaintiff shall file a response thereto.

3. On or before November 28, 2012, defendant may file a reply to plaintiff's response. SO ORDERED.

20121024

© 1992-2012 VersusLaw Inc.



Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.