Bavaria, German Free State of et al v. Toyobo Co., Ltd. et al, No. 1:2006cv00407 - Document 141 (W.D. Mich. 2007)
Court Description: ORDER granting 115 plaintiffs' motion to reconsider; the Courts Opinion and Order dismissing Plaintiffs claims against Defendant Toyobo America, Inc. with prejudice 103 & 104 are AMENDED to reflect Plaintiffs claims against Defendant Toyobo America, Inc. are DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE; signed by Senior Judge Richard Alan Enslen (Senior Judge Richard Alan Enslen, blb)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Bavaria, German Free State of et al v. Toyobo Co., Ltd. et al Case 1:06-cv-00407-RAE Document 141 Doc. 141 Filed 06/01/2007 Page 1 of 2 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION GERMAN FREE STATE OF BAVARIA, et al., Case No. 1:06-CV-407 Plaintiffs, Hon. Richard Alan Enslen v. TOYOBO CO., LTD, et al., ORDER Defendants. / This matter is before the Court on Plaintiffs’ Motion for Partial Reconsideration of the Court’s Opinion and Partial Judgement dismissing the claims against Defendant Toyobo America, Inc. with prejudice. Under Rule 7.4(a), Plaintiff must demonstrate that the Court’s Order suffers from a palpable defect, and must “also show that a different disposition of the case must result from a correction thereof.” W.D. M ICH. LC IVR 7.4(a). Plaintiffs request the Court vacate those portions of its Opinion and Order which dismissed Plaintiffs’ claims against Toyobo America, Inc. with prejudice. Plaintiffs assert a dismissal for lack of personal jurisdiction is not an adjudication on the merits for preclusive purposes and therefore, such a dismissal should be without prejudice to allow the action to be re-filed in an appropriate forum. See Intera Corp. v. Henderson, 428 F.3d 605, 620-21 (6th Cir. 2005) (holding a dismissal for lack of personal jurisdiction should be made ‘without prejudice’ as it does not operate as an adjudication on the merits and is consistent with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b).”); see also Pratt v. Ventas, Inc., 365 F.3d 514, 522 (6th Cir. 2004) (same). After review, the Court agrees and finds that a dismissal with prejudice for lack of personal jurisdiction is a palpable defect. Accordingly, Dockets.Justia.com Case 1:06-cv-00407-RAE Document 141 Filed 06/01/2007 Page 2 of 2 IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiffs’ Motion to Reconsider (Dkt. No. 115) is GRANTED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Court’s Opinion and Order dismissing Plaintiffs’ claims against Defendant Toyobo America, Inc. with prejudice (Dkt. Nos. 103, 104) are AMENDED to reflect Plaintiffs’ claims against Defendant Toyobo America, Inc. are DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. DATED in Kalamazoo, MI: June 1, 2007 /s/ Richard Alan Enslen RICHARD ALAN ENSLEN SENIOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 2
]]>
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You
should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Privacy Policy and
Terms of Service apply.
