Harris v. Ventyx Inc et al
| Matthew Harris |
| Ventyx Inc and United Health Care Insurance Company |
| 2:2011cv00308 |
| February 2, 2011 |
| U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California |
| Sacramento Office |
| Sacramento |
| Gregory G. Hollows |
| Frank C. Damrell |
| Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 |
| 29 U.S.C. ยง 1132 |
| None |
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
36
ORDER signed by Judge Frank C. Damrell, Jr on 8/12/2011 GRANTING 21 and 23 Motion for Judgment on the pleadings; Plaintiff's claims are DISMISSED with leave to amend; Plaintiff is granted 15 days from the date of this order to file a first amended complaint in accordance with this order; Defendants are granted 30 days from the date of Plaintiff's first amended complaint to file a response thereto. (Waggoner, D)
|
|
Filing
31
STIPULATION and ORDER 30 to continue Hearings signed by Judge Frank C. Damrell, Jr. on 5/23/2011. Defendants Ventyx and United Healthcare's 21 23 Motions for Judgment on the Pleadings Hearing is RE-SCHEDULED for 8/5/2011 at 10:00 AM in Courtroom 2 (FCD). (Marciel, M)
|
|
Filing
29
STIPULATION and ORDER signed by Judge Frank C. Damrell, Jr on 5/9/11: HEARING as to 23 MOTION for JUDGMENT, 21 MOTION FOR JUDGMENT RESET for 6/24/2011 at 10:00 AM in Courtroom 2 (FCD) before Judge Frank C. Damrell Jr.. (Kaminski, H)
|
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the U.S. 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.
