From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

New Century Bank v. Open Solutions, Inc.

United States District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania
May 2, 2011
CIVIL ACTION NO. 10-6537 (E.D. Pa. May. 2, 2011)

Summary

allowing FDIC to intervene as counterclaim defendant under Rule 24 even after final judgment was entered, and to move to dismiss counterclaims for lack of jurisdiction

Summary of this case from JPMorgan Chase Bank, Nat'l Ass'n v. Nell

Opinion

CIVIL ACTION NO. 10-6537.

May 2, 2011


ORDER


AND NOW, this 2nd day of May, 2011, for the reasons set forth in the accompanying Memorandum, it is hereby ORDERED that:

(1) the motion of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation to intervene (Doc. #60) as a defendant to the counterclaim of Open Solutions, Inc. is GRANTED;

(2) the motion of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation to dismiss the counterclaim for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction and to alter or amend the judgment (Doc. #61) is deemed filed;

(3) plaintiff New Century Bank d/b/a Customers Bank and defendant Open Solutions, Inc. shall file and serve, on or before May 17, 2011, any opposing brief to the motion of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation to dismiss the counterclaim for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction and to alter or amend the judgment; and

(4) the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation shall file and serve, on or before May 27, 2011, any reply brief.


Summaries of

New Century Bank v. Open Solutions, Inc.

United States District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania
May 2, 2011
CIVIL ACTION NO. 10-6537 (E.D. Pa. May. 2, 2011)

allowing FDIC to intervene as counterclaim defendant under Rule 24 even after final judgment was entered, and to move to dismiss counterclaims for lack of jurisdiction

Summary of this case from JPMorgan Chase Bank, Nat'l Ass'n v. Nell
Case details for

New Century Bank v. Open Solutions, Inc.

Case Details

Full title:NEW CENTURY BANK d/b/a CUSTOMERS BANK v. OPEN SOLUTIONS, INC

Court:United States District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania

Date published: May 2, 2011

Citations

CIVIL ACTION NO. 10-6537 (E.D. Pa. May. 2, 2011)

Citing Cases

UBER Techs. v. Boddie

Although a Rule 12(b)(6) motion is not among the “pleadings” set out in Rule 7(a), “courts have liberally…

JPMorgan Chase Bank, Nat'l Ass'n v. Nell

Because the FDIC satisfies all four requirements of Rule 24(a)(2), and because the Court in its discretion…