Peter Velasco et al v. Chrysler Group LLC
| Christopher Light, Peter Velasco, Christopher White and Jacqueline Young |
| Chrysler Group LLC |
| 2:2013cv08080 |
| November 1, 2013 |
| US District Court for the Central District of California |
| Victor B. Kenton |
| Dean D. Pregerson |
| Other Statutory Actions |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
188
AMENDED ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART MOTION TO UNSEAL 82 by Judge Dean D. Pregerson: The court GRANTS IN PART Center for Auto Safetys Motion to Unseal. The court hereby ORDERS Chrysler to refile Exhibit I removing the redactions at page I114, which the court found did not satisfy the compelling reasons standard. Chrysler is further ORDERED to refile the documents at Dkts. 53, 54, 66, 73 removing the redactions the court determined do not meet the compelling reasons standard. (lc) .Modified on 1/31/2017 (lc).
|
|
Filing
187
ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART MOTION TO UNSEAL [Dkt. 82] by Judge Dean D. Pregerson : Presently before the court is nonparty Center for Auto Safetys (CAS) Motion to Unseal documents related to Plaintiffs motion for a preliminary injunct ion, (Dkt. 49), which was denied on October 27, 2014the court GRANTS IN PART CASs Motion to Unseal. The court hereby ORDERS Chrysler to refile Exhibit I removing the redactions at page I114, which the court found did not satisfy the compelling reasons standard. Chrysler is further ORDERED to refile the documents at Dkts. 53, 54, 66, 73 removing there dactions the court determined do not meet the compelling reasons standard. (lc). Modified on 1/27/2017 (lc).
|
|
Filing
105
ORDER RE CENTER FOR AUTO SAFETYS MOTION TO UNSEAL 82 AND MOTION TO INTERVENE 81 by Judge Dean D. Pregerson: However, the denial is without prejudice, and CAS is free to move to intervene again in the event that future motions also present questi ons of public access to court records. Additionally, as all parties agree to the unsealing of certain documents, the Court hereby ORDER the Plaintiffs to file a single new document entitled DOCUMENTS PREVIOUSLY FILED, UNSEALED AS ORDERED BY THE COURT comprised of one unredacted copy of each of the following: Naor Decl. (Dkt. No. 55) & Ex. P thereto; Exs. H, Q to Stein Decl. (Dkt. No. 57); Ex. Q. to Hughes Decl. (Dkt. No. 74). (lc). Modified on 12/30/2014. (lc).
|
|
Filing
46
ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART DEFENDANTS MOTION TO DISMISS PLAINTIFFS SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT 42 by Judge Dean D. Pregerson: Defendant Chrysler's Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs' Second Amended Complaint is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART as follows: The Motion is GRANTED with respect to Count VII of the SAC (violation of the New Jersey Consumer Fraud Act) and Count VIII of the SAC (violation of the Magnuson- Moss Warranty Act), both of which are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. Chrysler's Motion to Dismiss is DENIED in all other respects. (lc). Modified on 8/22/2014. (lc).
|
|
Filing
35
PROTECTIVE ORDER by Magistrate Judge Victor B. Kenton re APPLICATION for Protective Order for Confidentiality and Return of Documents 32 (See Order for details and revision.) (rh)
|
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
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
