JACOBS VEHICLE SYSTEMS, INC. v. YANG

JACOBS VEHICLE SYSTEMS, INC. v. YANG

Plaintiff:	JACOBS VEHICLE SYSTEMS, INC.
Defendant:	ZHOU YANG
Case Number:	1:2012cv00181
Filed:	February 22, 2012
Court:	US District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina
Office:	NCMD Office
County:	XX US, Outside State
Presiding Judge:	UNASSIGNED
Presiding Judge:	JOI ELIZABETH PEAKE
Nature of Suit:	Other Contract
Cause of Action:	Diversity
Jury Demanded By:	Plaintiff

Follow case documents by RSS

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed	Document Text
July 31, 2015	Filing 116 MEMORANDUM OPINION AND RECOMMENDATION OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE signed by MAG/JUDGE JOE L. WEBSTER on 7/31/2015; RECOMMENDED that Defendant's motion for summary judgment (Docket Entry 46 ) be GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. More specifically, it is recommended that the motion be granted as to the civil conspiracy claim and the motion be denied as to all other claims. (Sheets, Jamie)
September 10, 2013	Filing 20 MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER signed by JUDGE THOMAS D. SCHROEDER on 9/10/2013; that JVS's objection to Yang's declaration (Doc. 16 ) is SUSTAINED IN PART and OVERRULED IN PART. The court will consider the declaration and exhibits for the purposes noted herein. FURTHER that Yang's motion to dismiss (Doc. 12 ) is GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART. It is GRANTED to the extent that the general allegations of the Trade Secret Protection Act claim identified in paragraph 54 of the amended complaint fail to state a claim upon which relief can be granted, and those allegations are DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE; in all other respects, Yangs motion is DENIED. (Sheets, Jamie)

Date Filed

Document Text

July 31, 2015

Filing 116 MEMORANDUM OPINION AND RECOMMENDATION OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE signed by MAG/JUDGE JOE L. WEBSTER on 7/31/2015; RECOMMENDED that Defendant's motion for summary judgment (Docket Entry 46 ) be GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. More specifically, it is recommended that the motion be granted as to the civil conspiracy claim and the motion be denied as to all other claims. (Sheets, Jamie)

September 10, 2013

Filing 20 MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER signed by JUDGE THOMAS D. SCHROEDER on 9/10/2013; that JVS's objection to Yang's declaration (Doc. 16 ) is SUSTAINED IN PART and OVERRULED IN PART. The court will consider the declaration and exhibits for the purposes noted herein. FURTHER that Yang's motion to dismiss (Doc. 12 ) is GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART. It is GRANTED to the extent that the general allegations of the Trade Secret Protection Act claim identified in paragraph 54 of the amended complaint fail to state a claim upon which relief can be granted, and those allegations are DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE; in all other respects, Yangs motion is DENIED. (Sheets, Jamie)

Access additional case information on PACER

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 North Carolina Middle District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: JACOBS VEHICLE SYSTEMS, INC. v. YANG
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Plaintiff: JACOBS VEHICLE SYSTEMS, INC.
Represented By:	WILLIAM JOSEPH MCMAHON, IV
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: ZHOU YANG
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.

Why Is My Information Online?