Gonzalez et al v. Compass Vision, Inc. et al
| Magda Gonzalez, Karen Hartson, Shawna Madison, Carrie Neill, Amy Shank, Amy Stokes, Syhanda Turnidge, Bairbre Walsh and Denise Westfahl |
| Compass Vision, Inc., National Medical Services, Inc. and Maximus, Inc. |
| Department of Consumer Affairs |
| 2:2009mc00114 |
| December 3, 2009 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of California |
| Sacramento Office |
| Sacramento |
| John A. Mendez |
| Kimberly J. Mueller |
| Plaintiff |
| Civil Miscellaneous Case |
| 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
24
PROTECTIVE ORDER signed by Judge Morrison C. England, Jr on 3/25/2010 ORDERING Good cause appearing, the foregoing Stipulated Protective Order applies to productionof documents, depositions, declarations, or other pre-trial testimony in the above actions. DCAs Motion for Reconsideration is withdrawn with prejudice as MOOT.(Waggoner, D)
|
|
Filing
18
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Gregory G. Hollows on 2/2/10 DENYING 11 Motion for Protective Order. (Donati, J)
|
|
Filing
9
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Gregory G. Hollows on 12/15/2009 ORDERING 1 Motions for Protective Order, filed 12/3/2009, are VACATED. Movant shall properly notice the motions for hearing pursuant to E. D. Local Rule 251(a). The re-noticed motions shall include copies of the subpoenas at issue. On refiling the motions, movant shall brief the issue described herein. (Reader, L)
|
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.
