Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Bashas' Inc.
| Equal Employment Opportunity Commission |
| Bashas' Inc. |
| 2:2009cv00209 |
| February 2, 2009 |
| US District Court for the District of Arizona |
| Phoenix Division Office |
| Maricopa |
| James A Teilborg |
| Other Statutes: Other Statutory Actions |
| Civil Miscellaneous Case |
| None |
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
110
CONFIDENTIALITY ORDER. Signed by Judge Robert C Broomfield on 12/8/11. (DMT)
|
|
Filing
70
ORDER that this court's September 2, 2010 order 67 is hereby WITHDRAWN; The "Motion to Compel Discovery Response and Motion for Confidentiality Order" 59 is DENIED in its entirety, and the "Motion to Strike" 66 is DENIED as moot. Signed by Judge Robert C Broomfield on 9/15/10. (DMT)
|
|
Filing
68
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE Show Cause Hearing set for 10/18/2010 10:00 AM in Courtroom 606, 401 West Washington Street, Phoenix, AZ 85003 before Judge Robert C Broomfield for respondent to show cause why they should not be compelled to comply with the subpo ena issued to them.That the Respondents be served with a copy of this Order to Show Cause by 9/8/10; and that the Respondents file and serve their answer to the Application no later than the 10/8/10. Signed by Judge Robert C Broomfield on 8/31/10. (DMT)
|
|
Filing
50
ORDER granting in part and denying in part Pla's 46 Motion to Clarify Order Granting Limited Discovery. Signed by Judge Robert C Broomfield on 12/23/09. (NOTE: See attached pdf for complete details).(ESL)
|
|
Filing
47
ORDERED that (1) in accordance with the applicable rules and law, Bashas shall timely file and serve its response to the E.E.O.C.'s Motion to Clarify; (2) in accordance with the applicable rules and law, the E.E.O.C. shall timely file and serve its reply; and the court FURTHER ORDERS that: (3) given this recently filed motion to clarify and the fairly imminent discovery response deadline, the court hereby VACATES the 11/7/09 discovery deadline. After full briefing, in its ruling on the E.E.O.C.s motion to clarify, the court will set a new discovery response deadline. Signed by Judge Robert C Broomfield on 10/27/09. (RCB)(.pdf document is attached)
|
|
Filing
40
ORDER - The court hereby ORDERS that: (1) the 1 "Application for an Order to Show Cause why an Administrative Subpoena Should not be Enforced" filed by petitioner, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, is DENIED without prejudice. FURTHER ORDERED that: the 10 "Motion for Leave to Conduct Limited Discovery" by respondent, Bashas', Inc. is GRANTED. Bashas' shall proceed with such discovery within the parameters set forth herein, including the six week time frame, which commences on the entry date of this order. Signed by Judge Robert C Broomfield on 9/30/09. (SAT)
|
|
Filing
32
ORDER The court being informed that the Bankruptcy Court has not yet ruled on Bashas' application to retain Steptoe & Johnson, LLP as counsel for Bashas' herein, the court, sua sponte, vacates without date the hearing currently scheduled fo r August 31, 2009. When this court rules on the EEOC's "Motion for Clarification that the EEOC is Exempt from Respondent Bashas' Stay of Proceedings on Bankruptcy Filing" doc. # 27 it will then reset the hearing date if necessary. Signed by Judge Robert C Broomfield on 8/25/09. (KMG, )
|
|
Filing
19
ORDERED that the Motion for Leave to Conduct Limited Discovery by respondent Bashas, Inc. (doc. 10) is set for hearing contemporaneously with the hearing on EEOCs Application for an OSC. FURTHER ORDERED that, consistent with this courts 5/6/09 order, Bashas shall file its Response to the EEOCs Order to Show Cause Why an Administrative Subpoena Should Not be Enforced (doc. 1) no later than 5 days after the filing of this order. FINALLY ORDERED that Bashas, Inc. appear on 6/30/09 at 1:30 p.m., in Courtroom 626, Sandra Day OConnor Courthouse, 401 W. Washington Street, Phoenix, Arizona 85003, and show cause why it should not be compelled to comply with the subpoena issued to it. At the hearing, the parties each shall be prepared to submit a proposed confidentiality order. Signed by Judge Robert C Broomfield on 6/18/09. (RCB)(.pdf document is attached)
|
|
Filing
13
ORDER that "Defendants' Motion to Transfer EEOCs Subpoena Enforcement Action" (doc. 281 in related CV02-591-PHX-RCB), i.e. EEOC v. Bashas, Inc., 2:09-cv-0209-JAT, is granted; IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that a copy of this order shall be provided to United States District Court Judge James A. Teilborg.. Signed by Judge Robert C Broomfield on 04/15/09. (ESL)
|
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 Arizona 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: Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Bashas' Inc. | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Plaintiff: Equal Employment Opportunity Commission | |
| Represented By: | Diana Crespo Weaver |
| 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: Bashas' Inc. | |
| 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.
