THIESSEN v. BLATT, HASENMILLER, LEIBSKER & MOORE, LLC et al, No. 5:2014cv05520 - Document 29 (E.D. Pa. 2015)

Court Description: OPINION/ORDER THAT THE MOTION TO DISMISS (DOC. NO. 12) IS GRANTED, AND THE COMPLAINT IS DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR AN EXTENSION OF TIME TO COMPLETE DISCOVERY (DOC. NO. 23) IS DENIED AS MOOT. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT THE CLERK SHALL MARK THIS CASE CLOSED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. SIGNED BY HONORABLE JEFFREY L. SCHMEHL ON 6/11/15. 6/12/15 ENTERED AND COPIES E-MAILED. (ky, )

Download PDF

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA PAUL THIESSEN v. C.A. NO. 14-5520 BLATT, HASENMILLER, LEIBSKER & MOORE, LLC, and PORTFOLIO RECOVERY ASSOCIATES, LLC, and X,Y,Z CORPORATIONS ORDER AND NOW, this 11th day of June, 2015, upon consideration of the defendants= motion to dismiss and all responses and replies thereto, it is hereby ORDERED that the motion to dismiss [Doc. 12] is GRANTED. It is further ORDERED that the Complaint is DISMISSED with prejudice. It is further Ordered that plaintiff=s motion for an extension of time to complete discovery [Doc23] is DENIED as moot. It is further ORDERED that the Clerk shall mark this case closed for statistical purposes. BY THE COURT: /s/ Jeffrey L. Schmehl JEFFREY L. SCHMEHL, J.

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.