Common use of Dkt Clause in Contracts

Dkt. No. 5] The Court granted the United States’ motion and, on June 17, 2009, the United States filed its Complaint-in-Intervention against certain of the Anadarko Entities. [Adv. Dkt. No. 25] 10. On July 31, 2009, Anadarko filed a motion to dismiss the Debtors’ Adversary Complaint. [Adv. Dkt. No. 45]. In an opinion issued March 31, 2010, and an order issued on April 30, 2010, the Court granted Anadarko’s motion to dismiss with respect to Counts IV, V, VI, VII, VIII, IX, X, XI, and the Debtors’ request for punitive damages. [Adv. Dkt. Nos. 117 & 125]. Count VII was dismissed with prejudice, and Counts VIII through XI were dismissed without prejudice to renewal in connection with the claims allowance process. The Court denied the Motion with respect to Counts I, II, and III, and dismissed Counts IV (breach of fiduciary duty), V (aiding and abetting breach of fiduciary duty), and VI (civil conspiracy) without prejudice and with leave to replead.