Stephen Echols v. Morpho Detection, Inc.
Plaintiff: Stephen Echols
Defendant: Transportation Security Agency, Janet Napolitano, Morpho Detection, Inc. and United States Department of Homeland Security
Case Number: 2:2013cv03162
Filed: May 3, 2013
Court: US District Court for the Central District of California
Presiding Judge: John E. McDermott
Presiding Judge: John F. Walter
Nature of Suit: Consumer Credit

Available Case Documents

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

Date Filed Document Text
March 11, 2014 Opinion or Order Filing 111 MINUTES (IN CHAMBERS) ORDER AWARDING ATTORNEYS FEES by Judge John F. Walter. Based on the foregoing, the Court finds that Plaintiff is entitled to recover attorneys' fees in the amount of $ 3,395.00. (jp)
December 9, 2013 Opinion or Order Filing 98 JUDGMENT by Judge John F. Walter; IT IS HEREBY ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the Motion for Summary Judgment, or in the Alternative, Summary Adjudication of Issuesbrought by Federal Defendants as against Plaintiff Stephen Echols is GRANTED. JUDGMENT IS HEREBY ENTERED in favor of Federal Defendants. Federal Defendants shall file a motion for an award of attorney fees and/or costs within thirty (30) days of this judgment being entered if they intend on pursuing same. Likewise, the Plaintiff shall file a motion for an award of attorney fees and/or costs under FOIA or the Privacy Act within fourteen (14) days of the judgment being entered, despite his claims being rendered moot, if he intends on pursuing same. (jp)
May 1, 2013 Opinion or Order Filing 50 ORDER TRANSFERRING CASE TO THE CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA. Signed by Judge Claudia Wilken on 5/1/2013. (ndr, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 5/1/2013) [Transferred from California Northern on 5/3/2013.]
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 California Central District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Stephen Echols v. Morpho Detection, Inc.
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Transportation Security Agency
Represented By: Mark R Conrad
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: Janet Napolitano
Represented By: Mark R Conrad
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: Morpho Detection, Inc.
Represented By: L Julius M Turman
Represented By: Philip James Smith
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: United States Department of Homeland Security
Represented By: Mark R Conrad
Represented By: Terrence M Jones
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 ]
Plaintiff: Stephen Echols
Represented By: John Lyster Fallat
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.


Why Is My Information Online?