Petrosyan v. Delfin Group USA LLC

Plaintiff: Levon Petrosyan
Defendant: Delfin Group USA LLC
Case Number: 2:2013cv02990
Filed: November 1, 2013
Court: South Carolina District Court
Office: Charleston Office
County: Charleston
Presiding Judge: Richard M Gergel
Referring Judge: Kaymani D West
Nature of Suit: Employment
Cause of Action: 42:2000
Jury Demanded By: Plaintiff

Available Case Documents

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

Date Filed#Document Text
February 18, 2015 37 Opinion or Order of the Court ORDER granting in part and denying in part 21 Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim; adopting Report and Recommendations re 31 Report and Recommendation. Signed by Honorable Patrick Michael Duffy on February 18, 2015.(lgra, )

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 South Carolina District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Petrosyan v. Delfin Group USA LLC
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Levon Petrosyan
Represented By: Jarrel L Wigger
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 [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Delfin Group USA LLC
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 [ 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 were retrieved from PACER, and should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.