Bray v. Siemens Industry, Inc. et al (LEAD)
| Matthew Bray |
| Siemens Industry, Inc. and Yongheng Huang |
| Southern Company |
| 2:2013mc03651 |
| October 22, 2013 |
| US District Court for the Middle District of Alabama |
| Montgomery Office |
| Jefferson |
| Charles S Coody |
| Mark E Fuller |
| Other Statutory Actions |
| Motion to Quash |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on February 27, 2014. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 29 NOTICE of Correction re #27 Joint Motion to Cancel Hearing. The referenced document contained a typographical error, Yongheng Huang included on signature page along with counsel of record. The corrected pdf is attached to this notice. (Attachments: #1 Corrected document #27 )(dmn, ) |
Filing 28
ORDER: Before the court is the #27 Joint Motion of Southern Company, Matthew Bray, and Siemens Industry, Inc., to Cancel the Oral Argument on the pending motions to quash currently set for 2/28/2014. In the motion, the parties advise the court that oral argument is no longer necessary because they have reached an agreement to resolve the discovery matters without court intervention. Having considered the motion, and for good cause, it is ORDERED that the #27 Motion to Cancel Oral Argument be and is hereby GRANTED. It is further ORDERED that the Oral Argument on the pending motions to quash (Doc. #1 & Doc. [1) currently set for 2/28/2014, be and is hereby CANCELLED. It is further ORDERED that the motion to quash filed by Southern Company (Doc. #1 , Case No. 2:13-mc-3651-MEF-CSC) be and is hereby DENIED as MOOT. It is further ORDERED that the motion to quash filed by Seimens Industry, Inc., (Doc. #1 , Case No. 2:13-mc-3653-MEF-CSC) be and is hereby DENIED as MOOT. It is further ORDERED that this case be and is hereby DISMISSED without prejudice. Signed by Honorable Judge Charles S. Coody on 2/27/2014. (Attachments: #1 Civil Appeals Checklist)Copies furnished to calendar group, WS. (Deadline terminated: Oral Argument set for 2/28/2014.) (dmn, )
|
| Filing 27 Joint MOTION to Cancel Hearing re #25 Order by Southern Company, Matthew Bray, and Siemens Industry, Inc. (Israel, Adam) Modified on 2/27/2014 to add additional filers omitted at original time of filing. (dmn, ) (Main Document 27 replaced on 2/27/2014 due to Yongheng Huang being included in error on signature page along with counsel of record.) (dmn, ). |
| Filing 26 NOTICE of Appearance by William Robert Chandler on behalf of Matthew Bray (Chandler, William) |
|
Filing 25
ORDER that the #24 Motion for Continuance be and is hereby GRANTED. Further, it is ORDERED that the Oral Argument on the pending motions to quash (Doc. #1 & #1 ) currently set for 2/20/2014 at 10:00 AM, be and hereby is RESET to 2/28/2014 at 1:30 PM in Courtroom 4B, in Montgomery, AL before Honorable Judge Charles S. Coody. Signed by Honorable Judge Charles S. Coody on 2/6/2014. Copies furnished to calendar group, WS.(dmn, )
|
| Filing 24 UNOPPOSED MOTION for Continuance of Hearing on Non-Party Southern Company's Consolidated Objection to and Motion to Quash Subpoena by Matthew Bray. (Attachments: #1 Text of Proposed Order)(Hilgers, Michael) Modified on 2/6/2014 to reflect actual title. (dmn, ) |
|
Filing 23
ORDER that the Motions to Quash (Doc. #1 & Doc. #1 ) be and are hereby set for Oral Argument on 2/20/2014 at 10:00 AM in Courtroom 4B in Montgomery, AL before Honorable Judge Charles S. Coody. Further, it is ORDERED that the #22 Motion for Order be and is hereby DENIED as moot. Signed by Honorable Judge Charles S. Coody on 1/17/2014. Copies furnished to calendar group, WS. (dmn, )
|
| Filing 22 MOTION for Order re #1 MOTION to Quash Unopposed Motion for Scheduling Order by Southern Company. (Tankersley, Will) |
| Filing 21 NOTICE of Correction re #20 Joint Notification, to attach a corrected PDF document to include the correct consolidated case styles and numbers and a corrected certificate of service page. (Attachments: #1 Corrected Main PDF Document to Docket Entry #20 )(wcl, ) |
| Filing 20 JOINT NOTIFICATION by Matthew Bray, Siemens Industry, Inc., Southern Company re #19 Order, Joint Notification of Ruling of Texas District Court. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A and B)(Hilgers, Michael) (Main Document 20 replaced on 1/2/2014 to attach a corrected PDF document to include the correct consolidated case styles and numbers and a corrected certificate of service page) (wcl, ). Modified on 1/2/2014 to add as also filed on behalf of the dfts and the movant (wcl, ). |
|
Filing 19
ORDER: Before the court is the #1 MOTION to Quash filed by Southern Company. Also before the court is the #1 MOTION to Quash filed by Siemens Industry, Inc. It is ORDERED that, within seven days of any ruling by the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas on Siemens Industrys objections to the protective order entered by Magistrate Judge Stephen Smith, the parties shall jointly notify the court of such ruling. This court will stay its ruling on the pending motions to quash until such notification has been filed. Signed by Honorable Judge Charles S. Coody on 12/16/2013. (dmn, )
|
| Filing 18 AMENDED REPLY in Support of #1 MOTION to Quash filed by Siemens Industry, Inc. (Huffaker, R.) Modified on 12/12/2013 to reflect actual title. (dmn, ) |
| Filing 17 NOTICE of Deficiency to Attorneys Alexander Lyle Kaplan, Christopher K. Gober, Richard Wolf Hess, Matthew W. Caligur, John R. Huffman, and L. Bradley Hancock regarding Attorney Electronic Registration (Attachments: #1 Standing Order 3164, #2 Attorney E-Registration Form)(scn, ) |
| Filing 16 REPLY BRIEF In Support of #1 Consolidated Objection to and Motion to Quash Subpoena, filed by Southern Company. (Tankersley, Will) Modified on 12/10/2013 to create relationship to #1 Objection and Motion (scn, ). (Additional attachment(s) added on 12/10/2013: #1 Corrected certificate of service) (scn, ). |
|
Filing 15
ORDER granting #13 Motion for Leave to File a Reply Brief. Signed by Honorable Judge Charles S. Coody on 12/9/2013. (dmn, )
|
|
Filing 14
ORDER granting #12 Motion for Leave to File a Reply Brief. Signed by Honorable Judge Charles S. Coody on 12/9/2013. (dmn, )
|
| Filing 13 MOTION for Leave to File Reply in Support of Consolidated Objection to and Motion to Quash Subpoena by Southern Company. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A)(Tankersley, Will) |
| Filing 12 MOTION for Leave to File Reply to the Plaintiff's #8 Response in Support of Motion to Quash Subpoena by Siemens Industry, Inc. (Huffaker, R.) Modified on 12/3/2013 to create link to Doc. #8 . (dmn, ). |
|
Filing 11
ORDER granting #7 Motion for Michael T. Hilgers to Appear Pro Hac Vice. Signed by Honorable Judge Mark E. Fuller on 11/22/2013. (dmn, )
|
| Filing 10 PRO HAC VICE Filing fee for Michael Hilgers re #7 Motion received: $ 50.00, receipt number 4602029104 (dmn, ) |
| Filing 9 BRIEF/MEMORANDUM in Opposition Opposition to Siemens Motion to Quash (consolidated from 2:13-MC-3653-MEF per 11/1/13 Order, Dkt No 4) filed by Matthew Bray. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit 1-7)(Hilgers, Michael) |
| Filing 8 BRIEF/MEMORANDUM in Opposition re #1 MOTION to Quash Opposition to Southern's Motion to Quash filed by Matthew Bray. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit 1, A-B)(Hilgers, Michael) |
| Filing 7 Motion to Appear Pro Hac Vice by Matthew Bray. (Attachments: #1 A and B)(Hilgers, Michael) |
|
Filing 6
ORDER that the #5 Motion for Thomas Kruse and Joshua C. Thomas to Appear Pro Hac Vice is GRANTED. Signed by Honorable Judge Mark E. Fuller on 11/15/2013. (dmn, )
|
| Filing 5 Motion for Thomas Kruse and Joshua C. Thomas to Appear Pro Hac Vice ( Filing fee $ 100.00 receipt number 4602029017) by Yongheng Huang, Siemens Industry, Inc. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A, #2 Exhibit B, #3 Exhibit C, #4 Exhibit D, #5 Pro Hac Vice Filing Fee Receipt)(dmn, ) |
|
Filing 4
ORDERED as follows: 1) that the Motion to Consolidate (Doc. 5, Case no. 2:13-MC-3653-MEF) be and is hereby GRANTED unless within 7 days from the date of this order an opposing party files objections; 2) that these cases be and are hereby CONSOLIDATED for all further proceedings. All future pleadings and motions shall be filed only in the lead case; and 3) that Bray v. Seimens Industry, Inc., Case no. 2:13-MC-3651-MEF, be and is hereby DESIGNATED as LEAD case; DIRECTING the Clerk to file a copy of this order in both cases referenced herein; further ORDERED that the deadline for the opposing parties to respond to the pending #1 Motion to Quash filed in Case no. 2:13-MC-3651-MEF be and hereby is EXTENDED from 11/8/2013, to 11/15/2013; further ORDERED that the deadline for the opposing parties to respond to the pending motion to quash (Doc. 1) filed in Case no. 2:13-MC-3653-MEF be and hereby is EXTENDED from 11/13/2013, to 11/15/2013. Signed by Honorable Judge Charles S. Coody on 11/1/2013. (wcl, )
|
| Cases associated: 2:13-mc-3651, Lead Case; 2:13-mc-3653, Member Case. (No pdf attached to this entry) (wcl, ) |
| ***Attorney John R. Huffman and L. Bradley Hancock for Yongheng Huang added. (No pdf attached to this entry) (wcl, ) |
| Filing 3 NOTICE of Appearance by R. Austin Huffaker, Jr on behalf of Siemens Industry, Inc. (Huffaker, R.) |
|
Filing 2
ORDER directing the opposing parties TO SHOW CAUSE as to why the #1 Motion to Quash filed by Southern Company should not be granted. Show Cause Response due by 11/8/2013. Signed by Honorable Judge Charles S. Coody on 10/25/2013. (dmn, )
|
| MOTION to Quash by Siemens Industry, Inc. (dmn, ) (This document has no pdf attached, see Doc. #1 for pdf.) |
| Filing 1 OBJECTION and MOTION to Quash by Southern Company. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A, #2 Filing Fee Receipt)(dmn, ) |
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 Alabama Middle 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.
