Warren Rubin et al v. Shlomo Margalit et al
| Beth Rubin and Warren Rubin |
| Shlomo Margalit, Noam Lotan, Guy Avidan, Near Margalit, Shay Gonen, Igal Shidlovsky, Guenter Jaensch, Daniel Tsui, Baruch Fischer, Harold W Furchtgott-Roth and MRV Communications, Inc. |
| 2:2008cv03800 |
| June 10, 2008 |
| US District Court for the Central District of California |
| Western Division - Los Angeles Office |
| Los Angeles |
| Chapman |
| Feess |
| Stockholders Suits |
| 15 U.S.C. ยง 78 m(a) Securities Exchange Act |
| Plaintiff |
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
307
FINAL JUDGMENT by Judge Gary A. Feess. In accordance with the Court's June 6, 2013 Memorandum and Order Regarding Motion for Final Approval of Derivative Settlement and Award of Attorneys' Fees (the "June 6, 2013 Memorandum and Order&q uot;), this consolidated case (including all related cases), is dismissed with prejudice. It is further ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that, for the reasons stated in the Court's June 6, 2013 Memorandum and Order, final judgment terminating the litigation as to all claims and all parties is hereby entered, and this consolidated case (including all related cases) is hereby closed. (MD JS-6, Case Terminated). (bp)
|
|
Filing
157
PROTECTIVE ORDER by Magistrate Judge Margaret A. Nagle re Joint REQUEST for Protective Order 153 (ec)
|
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 California Central 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.
