Earl v. Nielsen Media Research, Inc. et al
| Christine Earl |
| Nielsen Media Research, Inc. and VNU USA, Inc. |
| 2:2008cv00050 |
| January 8, 2008 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of California |
| Sacramento Office |
| Solano |
| Frank C. Damrell |
| Kimberly J. Mueller |
| Contract: Other |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1441 Petition For Removal--Other Contract |
| 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
152
ORDER CONTINUING TRIAL signed by Chief Judge Morrison C. England, Jr. on 1/17/2013 ORDERING that pursuant to the 151 Stipulation and Proposed Order to Continue Trial Date the 6/17/2013 jury trial is VACATED and CONTINUED to 3/31/2014, at 9:00 a.m. in Courtroom 7. The jury trial is confirmed for five (5) days. The parties shall file trial briefs not later than 1/23/2014. Accordingly, the 4/18/2013 Final Pretrial Conference is VACATED and CONTINUED to 2/6/2014, at 2:00 p.m. in Courtroom 7. Th e Joint Final Pretrial Statement is due not later than 1/16/2014. Any evidentiary or procedural motions are to be filed by 1/16/2014. Oppositions must be filed by 1/23/2014 and any reply must be filed by 1/30/2014. The motions will be heard by the Court at the same time as the Final Pretrial Conference. (Zignago, K.)
|
|
Filing
150
ORDER CONTINUING TRIAL signed by Judge Morrison C. England, Jr. on 10/24/2012 ORDERING that the 4/29/2013 jury trial is VACATED and CONTINUED to 6/17/2013, at 9:00 a.m. in Courtroom 7. The parties shall file trial briefs not later than 4/4/2013. The 2/21/2013 Final Pretrial Conference is VACATED and CONTINUED to 4/18/2013, at 2:00 p.m. in Courtroom 7. The Joint Final Pretrial Statement is due not later than 3/28/2013 and shall comply with the procedures outlined in the Court's 4/16/2012 Scheduling Order. Any evidentiary or procedural motions are to be filed by 3/28/2013. Oppositions must be filed by 4/4/2013 and any reply must be filed by 4/11/2013. The motions will be heard by the Court at the same time as the Final Pretrial Conference. All other due dates set forth in the Court's 149 Scheduling Order are confirmed. (Zignago, K.)
|
|
Filing
140
MEMORANDUM and ORDER denying 129 dfts' Motion for Attorney Fees, signed by Judge Frank C. Damrell, Jr., on 2/16/2010. (Kastilahn, A)
|
|
Filing
112
STIPULATION and ORDER signed by Judge Frank C. Damrell, Jr. on 7/28/09 ORDERING that Dfts shall have until 4:00 PM on 8/7/09 to file reply papers. Pltf shall have until 4:00 PM on 8/14/09 to file evidentiary objections to any evidence submitted in support of Dfts' reply papers. Pltf shall have until 4:00 PM on 7/30/09 to file an amended memorandum of points and authorities in opposition to the motion for summary judgment. (Engbretson, K.)
|
|
Filing
49
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Kimberly J. Mueller on 01/12/09 DENYING 41 Ex Parte Application; with respect to the motions noticed for hearing on 01/14/09, the parties shall advise the court by letter no later than 01/15/09 whether the discovery dispute has been resolved. No further briefing shall be entertained with respect to these motions; with respect to the motions noticed for hearing on 01/21/09 and 02/04/09, the parties are reminded that discovery disputes should first be resolved through good faith meeting and conferring. L.R. 37-251(b). If no resolution of the disputes covered by the motions can be reached, the parties may bring the matter before this court by letter brief filed no later than 02/02/09. (Manzer, C)
|
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 Eastern 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.
