Stephen Echols v. Morpho Detection, Inc.
||Transportation Security Agency, Janet Napolitano, Morpho Detection, Inc. and United States Department of Homeland Security
||May 3, 2013
||California Central District Court
||John E. McDermott
||John F. Walter
|Nature of Suit:
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
|Date Filed||#||Document Text|
|March 11, 2014
MINUTES (IN CHAMBERS) ORDER AWARDING ATTORNEYS FEES by Judge John F. Walter. Based on the foregoing, the Court finds that Plaintiff is entitled to recover attorneys' fees in the amount of $ 3,395.00. (jp)
|May 1, 2013
ORDER TRANSFERRING CASE TO THE CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA. Signed by Judge Claudia Wilken on 5/1/2013. (ndr, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 5/1/2013) [Transferred from California Northern on 5/3/2013.]
|December 9, 2013
JUDGMENT by Judge John F. Walter; IT IS HEREBY ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the Motion for Summary Judgment, or in the Alternative, Summary Adjudication of Issuesbrought by Federal Defendants as against Plaintiff Stephen Echols is GRANTED. JUDGMENT IS HEREBY ENTERED in favor of Federal Defendants. Federal Defendants shall file a motion for an award of attorney fees and/or costs within thirty (30) days of this judgment being entered if they intend on pursuing same. Likewise, the Plaintiff shall file a motion for an award of attorney fees and/or costs under FOIA or the Privacy Act within fourteen (14) days of the judgment being entered, despite his claims being rendered moot, if he intends on pursuing same. (jp)
Access additional case information on PACER
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system.
A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the California Central District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets were retrieved from PACER, and should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.