Gomes v. American Century Companies, Inc.
| Nelson Gomes |
| American Century Companies, Inc., American Century Global Investment Management, Inc., James E. Stowers, Jr., James E. Stowers, III, Jonathan S. Thomas, Thomas A. Brown, Andrea C. Hall, Donald H. Pratt, Gale E. Sayers, M. Jeannine Strandjord, Timothy S. Webster, William M. Lyons, Enrique Chan, Mark Kopinski, Brian Brady and American Century World Mutual Funds, Inc. |
| 2:2009cv02153 |
| August 4, 2009 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of California |
| Sacramento Office |
| Sacramento |
| Frank C. Damrell |
| Kimberly J. Mueller |
| Plaintiff |
| 18 U.S.C. ยง 1961 Racketeering (RICO) 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
27
ORDER signed by Judge Frank C. Damrell, Jr on 5/14/2010 ORDERING that for the foregoing reasons, defendants' 18 motion for sanctions pursuant to FRCP 11, 28 U.S.C. 1927 and the court's inherent power is DENIED.(Duong, D)
|
|
Filing
10
ORDER signed by Judge Frank C. Damrell, Jr on 9/14/2009 GRANTING 6 Stipulation and Proposed Order; Service of the Summons, the Complaint, the Order Requiring Joint Status Report, the Notice of Availability of Voluntary Dispute Resolution, and the N otice of Availability of Magistrate Judge to Exercise Jurisdiction and Appeal Instructions on all Defendants and the Nominal Defendant shall be deemed good and sufficient; Defendants shall have 60 days from the date of the stipulation upon which this order is based to answer or move with respect to the Complaint; In the event that Defendants move to transfer this case to a different district, then their time to answer or move with respect to the Complaint shall be extended until 30 days after th e entry of an order of the Court determining the motion to transfer; The Order Requiring Joint Status Report is hereby modified so as to extend the time of the parties to submit such a report until 60 days after (i) the determination of any motion addressed to the Complaint or (ii) the filing of any answer, whichever occurs earlier. (Matson, R)
|
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.
