Harkness v. Hoffman et al
Gordon Harkness |
David Hoffman and Richard Krammer |
1:2015cv00711 |
April 6, 2015 |
US District Court for the District of Colorado |
Denver Office |
XX US, Outside State |
Nina Y. Wang |
Other Contract |
28 U.S.C. ยง 1332 |
None |
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
Document Text |
---|
Filing 36 ORDER re: 35 MOTION for Preliminary Injunction filed by Plaintiff Gordon Harkness. it is ORDERED that Defendants shall file a response to the Motion for Preliminary Injunction by Friday, March 18, 2016. Plaintiff may file a reply b y Wednesday, March 30, 2016. It is FURTHER ORDERED that counsel for the parties shall jointly contact my Chambers at (303) 844- 2170 by Friday, March 11, 2016 to set a hearing on Plaintiffs Motion for Preliminary Injunction, by Judge Wiley Y. Daniel on 3/7/2016. (evana, ) |
Filing 28 ORDER denying as moot 5 Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction. By Judge Wiley Y. Daniel on 12/14/2015. (athom, ) |
Filing 8 ORDER SETTING RULE 16(b) SCHEDULING CONFERENCE by Magistrate Judge Nina Y. Wang on 5/22/15. A Scheduling Conference is set for 7/9/2015 02:30 PM in Courtroom C205 before Magistrate Judge Nina Y. Wang. The parties shall submit their proposed scheduling order through ECF, and including a copy of the proposed scheduling order in a Word format sent via email to Wang_Chambers@cod.uscourts.gov, seven days prior to the Scheduling Conference. (bsimm, ) |
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 Colorado 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.