Kyros v. North American Bioproducts Corporation
| George Kyros |
| North American Bioproducts Corporation |
| 4:2009cv03041 |
| March 2, 2009 |
| US District Court for the District of Nebraska |
| Contract: Recovery/Enforcement Office |
| Sarpy |
| Richard G. Kopf |
| David L. Piester |
| Both |
| Diversity |
| 28:1441 Petition for Removal |
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
43
JUDGMENT - Pursuant to the parties' Joint Motion and Stipulation to Dismiss the Lawsuit With Prejudice (filing 42 ) and Fed. R. Civ. P. 41, IT IS ORDERED that this action, including Plaintiffs complaint and Defendant's counterclaims, is dismissed with prejudice, each party to pay its own attorney fees and costs. Ordered by Judge Richard G. Kopf. (JAB)
|
|
Filing
40
SETTLEMENT ORDER. It is ordered that: (1)Within thirty (30) calendar days of the date of this order, the parties shall file a joint stipulation for dismissal (or other dispositive stipulation) with the clerk of the court (and provide a copy to the m agistrate judge and to United States District Judge Richard G. Kopf, the trial judge to whom this case is assigned), together with submitting to the trial judge a draft order which will fully dispose of the case;(2)Absent compliance with this order, this case (including all counterclaims and the like) may be dismissed without further notice;(3)This case is removed from the court's trial docket upon representation by the parties that the case has settled.***Set Dismissal Papers Deadline -- due by 1/8/2010. Ordered by Judge Richard G. Kopf. (KLL, )
|
|
Filing
24
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER - With the agreement of Judge Piester, the Chief Judge and the other district judges, Judge Kopf has begun handling all magistrate matters previously handled by Judge Piester. As to those cases listed, unless a party files a moti on to request a telephonic planning conference on or before July 10, 2009, no planning conference will be held to discuss the scheduling of the case to trial, and a final progression order will be entered based on the representations set forth in the parties' Rule 26(f) Report. Ordered by Judge Richard G. Kopf. (LKH)
|
|
Filing
19
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER denying 11 Motion to Change Venue. Ordered by Magistrate Judge David L. Piester. (LKH)
|
|
Filing
17
ORDER granting 16 Defendant's Motion to Extend Deadline. The deadline for filing the parties' Rule 26 planning conference report is extended to May 1, 2009. Ordered by Magistrate Judge David L. Piester. (JAB)
|
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 Nebraska 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
| Search for this case: Kyros v. North American Bioproducts Corporation | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Plaintiff: George Kyros | |
| Represented By: | Jennifer R. Petersen |
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Finance | [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Defendant: North American Bioproducts Corporation | |
| Represented By: | Adam J. Prochaska |
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Finance | [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
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.
