Acton v. Target Corporation et al
| Scot B Acton |
| Target Corporation and Target Stores Inc |
| 2:2008cv01149 |
| August 1, 2008 |
| US District Court for the Western District of Washington |
| Civil Rights: Jobs Office |
| Skagit |
| Richard A Jones |
| Plaintiff |
| Federal Question |
| 29:2601 Family & Medical Leave Act |
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
115
ORDER by Judge Richard A Jones. The Court DENIES 86 Defendant Target Corporation's motion for summary judgment, and DENIES Mr. Acton's untimely motion (Dkt. # 106 ) for leave to file an untimely surreply. The parties shall submit a joint statement by April 16, 2010, stating their preferred option as to when to start trial. (CL)
|
|
Filing
81
ORDER granting 57 Motion in Limine; denying 60 Motion for Reconsideration ; denying 62 Motion for a Protective Order; denying 65 Motion to Seal; granting 79 Stipulated Motion to Take Deposition of Levi Nyberg on 1/7/2010, by Judge Richard A Jones. Plaintiff's counsel is ordered to show cause why sanctions should not be imposed for making a false statement to the court. (JJ)
|
|
Filing
56
ORDER granting in part and denying in part 31 Motion to Compel by Judge Richard A Jones. Target shall provide additional discovery as ordered no later than November 18, 2009. (JJ)
|
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 Washington Western 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.
