Joseph Odish et al v. Cognitive Code Corporation et al
| John Bourbeau, Cranbrook Capital Consulting Group LLC and Joseph Odish |
| John Chen, Mimi Chen, Cognitive Code Corporation, Sal Difazio and Leslie Spring |
| 2:2012cv09069 |
| October 22, 2012 |
| US District Court for the Central District of California |
| Jay C. Gandhi |
| S. James Otero |
| Contract: Other |
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
306
ORDER RE: STIPULATION 305 DISMISSING ACTION by Judge Fernando M. Olguin. (Case Terminated; Made JS-6) (vdr)
|
|
Filing
240
JUDGMENT by Judge Fernando M. Olguin, in favor of defendant's on motion for summary judgment. (MD JS-6; Case Terminated). (vdr)
|
|
Filing
212
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE RE LACK OF PROSECUTION by Judge Fernando M. Olguin: On or before April 6, 2015 at 5:00 p.m., defendants shall show cause, if any there be, why their counterclaims against Cranbrook should not be dismissed for failure to prosecute. The filing of a motion for default judgment shall also be considered a satisfactory response to the Order to Show Cause. IT IS SO ORDERED. (cw)
|
|
Filing
154
(IN CHAMBERS) ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE RE: SANCTIONS by Judge Fernando M. Olguin. Response to Order to Show Cause due by 5:00 PM on 10/9/2014. (vdr)
|
|
Filing
25
ORDER ON STIPULATION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER by Magistrate Judge Jay C. Gandhi re Stipulation for Protective Order 24 . The parties to this action, through their counsel of record, have stipulated and agreed that an order under Federal Rule of Civil Pro cedure 26(c) is necessary and useful to protect the confidentiality of documents and other information obtained in the course of discovery in this action, and have stipulated and agreed to be bound by the terms of this Protective Order ("Protect ive Order"). The materials to be exchanged in the course of this litigation may contain confidential information including but not limited to trade secret or other confidential research, marketing, financial or other commercial information. The purpose of this Protective Order is to protect the confidentiality of such materials during the litigation. (See Order for details) (bem)
|
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.
