Hart v. PAE Government Services Incorporated
Plaintiff: John Henry Hart
Defendant: PAE Government Services Incorporated
Case Number: 2:2010cv01672
Filed: June 29, 2010
Court: US District Court for the Eastern District of California
Office: Sacramento Office
County: Sacramento
Presiding Judge: Edmund F. Brennan
Presiding Judge: Frank C. Damrell
Nature of Suit: Other Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 1983
Jury Demanded By: None

Available Case Documents

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

Date Filed Document Text
June 8, 2012 Opinion or Order Filing 75 FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Edmund F. Brennan on 6/8/12 RECOMMENDING that 62 Motion for Summary Judgment be granted and 66 Motion for Summary Judgment be denied; and the Clerk of Court be directed to enter judgment for defendant and close this case. Referred to Judge Kimberly J. Mueller; Objections to F&R due within 14 days after service of the objections. (Meuleman, A)
January 23, 2012 Opinion or Order Filing 69 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Edmund F. Brennan on 1/23/12: The November 29, 2011 order to show cause is discharged 63 . HEARING as to 62 Motion for Summary Judgment RESET for 3/7/2012 at 10:00 AM in Courtroom 24 (EFB) before Magistrate Judge Edmund F. Brennan. On or before February 15, 2012, plaintiff shall file a revised opposition to the motion. Defendants may file a reply to plaintiff's opposition on or before February 22, 2012. (Kaminski, H)
November 29, 2011 Opinion or Order Filing 63 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Edmund F. Brennan on 11/29/11; IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: The hearing on defendants motion for summary judgment, Dckt. No. 62, is continued to January 25, 2012. Plaintiff shall show cause, in writing, no later than J anuary 4, 2012, why sanctions should not be imposed for failure to timely file an opposition or a statement of non-opposition to the pending motion. Plaintiff shall file an opposition to the motion, or a statement of non- opposition thereto, no late r than January 4, 2012. Failure of plaintiff to file an opposition will be deemed a statement of non- opposition to the pending motion, and may result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed for lack of prosecution and/or for failure to comply with court orders and this court's Local Rules. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b). Defendant may file a reply to plaintiff's opposition, if any, on or before January 18, 2012.(Matson, R)
September 15, 2011 Opinion or Order Filing 61 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Edmund F. Brennan on 9/15/2011 DENYING, without prejudice, plaintiff's Motions 59 for Dispute Resolution and 60 for Partial Relief. (Marciel, M)
August 25, 2011 Opinion or Order Filing 56 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Edmund F. Brennan on 8/25/2011 ORDERING 52 Motion to Compel is DENIED without prejudice, and 8/31/2011 hearng on that motion is VACATED; parties are directed to meet and confer either telephonically or in person in an effort to resolve the discovery dispute without court intervention; to the extent plaintiff's 8/22/2011 filing is construed as an ex parte application to have a motion for a protective order heard on shortened time, as a motion for reconsideration of the 8/5/2011 order granting defendant discovery sanctions, or as a motion for reconsideration of the 8/5/2011 order granting defendant's ex parte application to modify the scheduling order, these motions are DENIED. (Waggoner, D)
August 22, 2011 Opinion or Order Filing 54 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Edmund F. Brennan on 8/22/2011 ORDERING that Dft's 49 Ex Parte Application to modify the Status (Pretrial Scheduling) Order is GRANTED. The Status (Pretrial Scheduling) Order is MODIFIED as follows: Designation of Expert Witnesses due by 11/7/2011; Discovery due by 1/13/2012; Non-Dispositive Motions filed by 3/14/2012; Final Pretrial Conference set for 6/20/2012 at 11:00 AM in Courtroom 3 (KJM) before District Judge Kimberly J. Mueller; Jury Trial set for 9/24/2012 at 09:00 AM in Courtroom 3 (KJM) before District Judge Kimberly J. Mueller. The Clerk is directed to return to Pltf the flash drive that Pltf submitted to the Court on 8/15/2011. (Zignago, K.) Modified on 8/22/2011 (Zignago, K.).
August 5, 2011 Opinion or Order Filing 47 ORDER denying 35 Motion for Reconsideration signed by Magistrate Judge Edmund F. Brennan on 8/3/2011; ORDERING that within 21 days of the date of this order, plaintiff shall produce all documents responsive to defendant's First Set of Requests for Production of Documents, without objection, or shall provide a verification under penalty of perjury that, after a reasonable search, plaintiff has already produced all responsive documents within his prossession, custody, or control; within 30 days from date of this order, at a specific date and time to be noticed by defendant, plaintiff shall appear for his deposition without objection; within 30 days of the date of this order, plaintiff shall pay to defendant's counsel $1932.00 (based on awards of $1000.00, $603.50 and $328.50 addressed in 33 Order). (Waggoner, D)
July 11, 2011 Opinion or Order Filing 40 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Edmund F. Brennan on 7/11/11 DENYING pltf's 38 Motion for Summary Judgment without prejudice. (Manzer, C)
July 6, 2011 Opinion or Order Filing 37 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Edmund F. Brennan on 07/06/11 ordering plaintiff's motion for reconsideration 35 will be heard on Wednesday 08/03/11 at 10:00 a.m. in courtroom 24. On or before 07/20/11, defendant shall file an opposition or a statement of non-opposition to the motion for reconsideration. On or before 07/27/11, plaintiff may file a reply to defendant's opposition, if any.(Plummer, M)
June 28, 2011 Opinion or Order Filing 33 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Edmund F. Brennan on 06/28/11 ORDERING that dft's 25 Motion to Compel is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART; w/i 21 days plf shall produce all documents responsive to dft's First Set of Requests for Produc tion of Documents, without objection, or shall provide a verification under penalty of perjury that, after a reasonable search, plf has already produced all responsive documents within his possession, custody, or control; dft's 26 Motion to Co mpel plf's deposition is GRANTED and dft's related Request for Sanctions is GRANTED IN PART. Within 60 days, at a specific date and time to be noticed by dft, plf shall appear for his deposition without objection; w/i 30 days, plf shall pay $1,932.00 to dft's counsel. Plaintiff is admonished that continued failures to comply with the Local Rules and/or the FRCP may result in the imposition of sanctions, including additional monetary sanctions and/or terminating sanctions which would result in the dismissal of this action. (Benson, A.)
May 20, 2011 Opinion or Order Filing 28 ORDER to SHOW CAUSE signed by Magistrate Judge Edmund F. Brennan on 05/20/11 ORDERING that the hearing on dft's 25 , 26 Motions to Compel are CONTINUED to 06/22/2011 at 10:00 AM in Courtroom 24 (EFB) before Magistrate Judge Edmund F. Brennan; plf shall SHOW CAUSE by 06/08/11 why sanctions should not be imposed for failure to timely file a response to the pending motions; plf shall file a response to the motions no later than 06/08/11; dft may file a reply to plf's response, if any, by 06/15/11; the expert disclosure deadline is EXTENDED to 08/05/11. (Benson, A.)
March 17, 2011 Opinion or Order Filing 24 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Edmund F. Brennan on 3/17/11 DENYING 22 Motion for Summary Judgment without prejudice. (Manzer, C)
December 10, 2010 Opinion or Order Filing 10 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Edmund F. Brennan on 12/10/2010 ORDERING 8 Defendant filed 9 an answer to plaintiff's complaint. Therefore, plaintiff's motion, is DENIED as MOOT. (Reader, L)
November 9, 2010 Opinion or Order Filing 7 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Edmund F. Brennan on 11/9/2010 DENYING plaintiff's 6 Motion for Summary Judgment without prejudice. (Marciel, M)
August 31, 2010 Opinion or Order Filing 3 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Edmund F. Brennan on 8/30/2010 ORDERING that Pltf's 2 Motion to Proceed IFP is GRANTED. The Clerk is directed to issue all process pursuant to FRCP 4. The Clerk to send two USM-285 forms, one summons, a copy of the complaint, scheduling order, consent/decline, and VDRP docs. Within 14 days Pltf shall submit service documents to the USM and file a statement with the court that documents have been submitted. (cc: USM) (Zignago, K.)
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 Eastern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Hart v. PAE Government Services Incorporated
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: John Henry Hart
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: PAE Government Services Incorporated
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?