Bhimsain Mangla v. Yingli Green Energy Holding Company Limited et al
| Bhimsain Mangla |
| Liansheng Miao, Yiyu Wang and Yingli Green Energy Holding Company Limited |
| 2:2015cv04600 |
| June 17, 2015 |
| US District Court for the Central District of California |
| Christina A. Snyder |
| Michael R. Wilner |
| Securities/Commodities |
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
38
ORDER AND FINAL JUDGMENT by Judge Otis D. Wright, II: Court finds prerequisites for class action have been satisfied. Settlement is approved. Complaint against defendant is dismissed with prejudice and without costs. Plaintiff's counsel awarded $300,000.00 in attorney fees and $54,685.07 in reimbursement of costs and expenses, together with proportionate share of any interest earned on the settlement fund. Plaintiffs Noe and Salvador Barocio and Cindy Conybear awarded 5000.00 each for a total of $15,000.00 for incentive fee award and reimbursement for lost time in connection of this action. (SEE DOCUMENT FOR OTHER SPECIFICS). (lc)
|
|
Filing
35
JUDGMENT 34 by Judge Otis D. Wright, II. It is therefore ORDERED, ADJUDGED, and DECREED as follows: 1. Plaintiffs Kevin Knox, Noe Barocio, Salvador Barocio, Cindy Conybear, and Bhimsain Mangla shall recover nothing from Defendant Yingli Green Energ y Holding Company; 2. The individual claims of Plaintiff Kevin Knox, Noe Barocio, Salvador Barocio, Cindy Conybear, and Bhimsain Mangla against Defendant Yingli Green Energy Holding Company are dismissed on the merits and with prejudice; 3. The claim s of the putative class members in both actions are dismissed without prejudice; 4. Defendants Liansheng Miao, Yiyu Wang, and Zongwei "Brian" Li are dismissed from both actions without prejudice; 5. Defendant Yingli Green Energy Holding Company shall recover its costs as evidenced by a Bill of Costs. IT IS SO ORDERED. (MD JS-6, Case Terminated). (lom)
|
|
Filing
32
ORDER ON MOVANT'S MOTION TO STRIKE 48 by Judge Otis D. Wright, II. It appears that Erodiades did indeed make several arguments for the first time in this reply brief, including that the Barocios' newly claimed losses were untimely and that Noe Barocio did not execute the original underlying certification. (ECF. no. 41) However, because the Barocios substantively responded to both of these points in their Motion to Strike, the Court declines to strike Erodiades' reply and will instead consider the Barocios' Motion as a sur-reply to Erodiades' reply. (lom)
|
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.
