Level One Technologies, Inc. v. Penske Truck Leasing Co., L.P. et al
Level One Technologies, Inc. |
Penske Truck Leasing Co., L.P. and Penske Logistics, LLC |
4:2014cv01305 |
July 24, 2014 |
US District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri |
St. Louis Office |
St. Louis - County |
Rodney W. Sippel |
Other Fraud |
28 U.S.C. ยง 1332 |
Both |
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
Document Text |
---|
Filing 289 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER - IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Level Ones motion to exclude certain portions of Hoffmans testimony, [No 241], is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. Opinion 3.2.3 will be excluded because it has no probative value. Fed. R. Evid. 402. Signed by District Judge Rodney W. Sippel on 10/18/18. (KJS) |
Filing 288 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER: IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Penskes motion for summary judgment, 185 , is DENIED. Signed by District Judge Rodney W. Sippel on 9/25/18. (KEK) |
Filing 276 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER - IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Penskes Motion in Limine to Exclude Non-Disclosed Evidence and Testimony, [No. 236 ], is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. Penske may seek to introduce the evidence and testimony in question at trial. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that iGate and Penske must produce the monthly registers in question as well as Rajasekarans spreadsheet. iGate and Penske also must make Rajasekaran available for deposition on the subject of the spreadsheet, the monthly registers, and any other time records in question. Signed by District Judge Rodney W. Sippel on 8/10/18. (KJS) |
Filing 273 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER : IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Penske's motion to exclude Dr. Rosenbergs testimony, No. 178 , is DENIED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Penske's motion to exclude Taylors testimony, No. 182 , is GRANTED in part and DENIED i n part. Taylor's Opinion 1 and Opinion 3 shall be excluded from trial because they pertain to the dismissed lost volume and unjust enrichment claims, respectively. Penske's motion to exclude, No. 182 , is denied to the extent that it seeks to exclude Taylor's Opinion 2. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Level One's consent motion to dismiss Count V, No. 265 , is GRANTED. Penske's motion to dismiss Count V with prejudice, No. 254 , and Level Ones motion to amend, No. 257 , are accordingly DENIED as moot. Signed by District Judge Rodney W. Sippel on 7/16/18. (ARL) |
Filing 268 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER: IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Penske's motion for summary judgment, [No. 130], is GRANTED in part. Upon revisiting the matter, Level One's unjust enrichment claim (Count VI) is DISMISSED.. Signed by District Judge Rodney W. Sippel on 5/14/18. (LGK) |
Filing 197 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER : IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Penskes Motion for Partial Summary Judgment 130 is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. Subparagraphs 101(a), 101(b), 101(c), and 101(g) of Count I of Level Ones Second Amended Complaint are dismisse d with prejudice. Counts II, III, and IV of Level Ones Second Amended Complaint are dismissed with prejudice in their entirety.IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Level One shall file an amended complaint no later than February 23, 2018. Signed by District Judge Rodney W. Sippel on 1/25/18. (ARL) |
Filing 32 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER: IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff Level One Technologies, Inc.'s motion for reconsideration # 26 is DENIED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff shall file an amended complaint in accordance with the terms of this Order and the Court's March 20, 2015 Order no later than April 27, 2015. Signed by District Judge Rodney W. Sippel on 4/17/15. (JWD) |
Filing 25 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER: IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendants' Motion to Dismiss Case and for a More Definite Statement # 11 is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. Counts I, II, IV, V, X, and XII are dismissed with prejudice. Count VI is dismissed without prejudice. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff shall file an amended complaint in accordance with the terms of this Order no later than April 10, 2015. Signed by District Judge Rodney W. Sippel on 3/20/15. (JWD) |
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 Missouri Eastern 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.