White v. Smyers et al
Plaintiff: Walter Howard White
Defendant: D. Smyers, S. Mulios, E. Jean Pierre, Olga Beregovskaya, M. Bobbala, M. Rahimi, A. Rotman, G. Otanez, L. Peters, Ken Clark, G. Martinez, A. Enenmo, R. Miranda, R. Mayes, L. R. Schmidt, B. Lee, Pomazal, D. Swingle, C. Young, D. Frazier, D. Garbutt, Utilization Management Team, M. Shea, Y. Aguila, C. Nules, G. Milliken, L. D. Zamora, Tyler, Lankford and Rofling
Case Number: 2:2012cv02868
Filed: November 26, 2012
Court: US District Court for the Eastern District of California
Office: Sacramento Office
County: Lassen
Presiding Judge: Allison Claire
Presiding Judge: Morrison C. England
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 42 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
August 24, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 229 FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Allison Claire on 8/24/2017 RECOMMENDING that this action be dismissed without prejudice for failure to prosecute. Referred to Judge Morrison C. England, Jr. Objections due within 14 days after being served with these findings and recommendations. (Henshaw, R)
July 20, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 224 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Allison Claire on 07/19/17 granting 223 Motion to modifiy the scheduling order. These parties have until 07/24/17 to file a dispositive motion. (Plummer, M)
January 3, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 211 ORDER signed by District Judge Morrison C. England, Jr on 1/3/17 DENYING 205 Motion for emergency injunctive relief. (Dillon, M)
December 19, 2016 Opinion or Order Filing 206 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Allison Claire on 12/19/16 ordering The Deputy Attorney General, Ms. Kelli Hammond, who represents most of thedefendants in this action, is directed to file and serve, on or before Wednesday, December 28,2016, a resp onse to plaintiffs Emergency Request for Protective Order filed December 15,2016, see 205 , concerning plaintiffs potential placement and conditions on his parolescheduled for January 5, 2016. Plaintiff is directed to refrain from filing a reply his 85-pagemotion adequately reflects his concerns and time is of the essence. (Plummer, M)
September 30, 2016 Opinion or Order Filing 201 ORDER ADOPTING 190 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS in full signed by District Judge Morrison C. England, Jr. on 09/30/16 ORDERING that plaintiff's 174 Motion for Preliminary Injunction is DENIED. (Benson, A)
September 29, 2016 Opinion or Order Filing 200 ORDER signed by District Judge Morrison C. England, Jr. on 09/27/16 ORDERING that plaintiff's 182 , 184 Motions for Reconsideration are DENIED. (Benson, A)
September 13, 2016 Opinion or Order Filing 196 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Allison Claire on 9/13/16 ORDERING that on or before September 22, 2016, any party may file and serve objections to the findings and recommendations filed August 23, 2016 (ECF No. 190 ); no further extensions of ti me will be granted. Plaintiff's motion filed September 9, 2016, ECF No. 194 , is GRANTED AS FOLLOWS: Deputy California Attorney General Ms. Hammond is requested to do the following: a. Within 7 days after the filing date of this order: (i) con tact the CSPRJD Litigation Coordinator and ascertain when plaintiff will be in possession of all his legal materials; and (ii) file and serve a statement so informing the court. b. Within 14 days after the filing date of this order: (i) ascertain f rom each defense counsel the earliest available dates when all attorneys will be available to conduct and conclude plaintiffs deposition;2 (ii) schedule with the CSP-RJD Litigation Coordinator an agreed-upon date to conduct and conclude plaintiff&# 039;s deposition, when plaintiff will be in possession of all his legal materials and appropriate arrangements can be made to accommodate plaintiff's physical limitations and pain symptoms; and (iii) file and serve a statement so informing plaintiff and the court.(Dillon, M)
August 23, 2016 Opinion or Order Filing 190 ORDER; FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Allison Claire on 8/23/16 ORDERING that plaintiff's October 7, 2015 motion to stay this action, ECF No. 172 , is DENIED as moot; and plaintiff's August 19, 2016 motion to st ay this action, ECF No. 187 , is DENIED on the merits. It is HEREBY RECOMMENDED that plaintiff's motion for preliminary injunctive relief, ECF No. 174 , be denied. Referred to Judge Morrison C. England, Jr.; Objections to F&R due within 14 days.(Dillon, M)
March 8, 2016 Opinion or Order Filing 180 ORDER signed by Chief Judge Morrison C. England, Jr. on 3/7/2016 DENYING 157 Motion for Reconsideration. (Zignago, K.)
February 4, 2016 Opinion or Order Filing 179 ORDER denying plaintiff's 173 Motion for Reconsideration, signed by Chief Judge Morrison C. England, Jr., on 2/2/16. (Kastilahn, A)
October 6, 2015 Opinion or Order Filing 171 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Allison Claire on 10/6/15 ORDERING that The October 16, 2015 deadline for conducting plaintiffs deposition is VACATED. Within 21 days after the filing date of this order, Ms. Ellen Hung, theDeputy Attorney General re presenting the majority of defendants in this action, shall file and serve a statement addressing the following matters: Contact with the HDSP Litigation Coordinator (and, if necessary, the CSATFLitigation Coordinator and other appropriate officials with the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation) to ascertain the location(s) of all of plaintiffs legal materials pertaining to the instant action; andif plaintiff is not in possession of all pertinent legal materials, identifying t he missing materials, their location(s), and the date(s) when such documents will be delivered to plaintiff. If plaintiff is not in possession of all pertinent legal materials within the twenty-onedayperiod provided herein, the Deputy Attorney Gener al shall file and serve a statement informing the court and other parties when such materials are delivered to plaintiff; if necessary, the Deputy Attorney General shall provide status reports every 14 days until such materials are delivered to plai ntiff. Within fourteen days after plaintiff is in possession of all pertinent legal materials, counsel for all defendants shall file and serve a joint statement informing the court of the date and time scheduled for plaintiffs further and final deposition, which shall be scheduled at the earliest convenience of the parties and HDSP officials.(Dillon, M)
August 6, 2015 Opinion or Order Filing 162 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Allison Claire on 8/5/15 ORDERING that Plaintiffs Supplemental Statement, ECF No. 158 , construed as a further request for protective order precluding plaintiffs further deposition, is DENIED, for the reasons previo usly stated by the court, see ECF No. 153 at 5-8, 9. Subject to the conditions previously established by the court, see id. at 7-8, defendants shall together schedule plaintiffs further deposition on one day between August 31, 2015 and October 16, 2015, and shall inform the court of such date within five days of its scheduling.(Dillon, M)
July 14, 2015 Opinion or Order Filing 153 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Allison Claire on 07/12/15 ordering plaintiff's most recent motion to stay proceedings in this action pending receipt of his legal materials 143 is denied as moot. Defendant Pomazal's request to propound further discovery requests on plaintiff, as described in 144 is granted; defendant shall serve his request on plaintiff within 14 days after the filing date of this order; plaintiff shall serve his response within 21 days after service of the requ ests-no extensions of time will be granted. Plaintiff's request for an extension of time 151 within which to file a motion for reconsideration of this court's 4/16/15 order 126 is granted; plaintiff shall file and serve such motion wit hin 14 days after the filing date of this order. If plaintiff wishes to further respond to the court's 4/24/15 order 133 he shall, within 14 days after the filing date of this order, file and serve a supplemental brief in conformance with the requirements set forth in Footnote 3, supra, that clearly identifies his remaining discovery needs. Plaintiff's motion for sanctions against the Deputy Attorney General 119 is denied; plaintiff is again admonished to refrain from filing exce ssive, harassing or frivolous matters in this case. Plaintiff's motion for a protective order denying his further deposition 119 (motion to suppress) is denied. Defendants' motions 93 , 117 and requests [144-146] to extend discovery in this case for the purpose of reconvening plaintiff's deposition for a third and final time are granted; plaintiff's deposition should be scheduled between 8/31/15 and 10/16/15; defendants shall inform the court of such date with 5 days o f its scheduling. The discovery deadline is hereby extended to 10/16/15 for the limited purposes authorized herein. The deadline for filing pretrial motions is hereby continued to 1/29/16 and shall be noticed and briefed in accordance with the Rand Notice provided herewith. Pursuant to a separate order filed concurrently with this order, the court directs the U.S. Marshal to serve plaintiff's 3 authorized subpoenas duces tecum. (Plummer, M)
May 12, 2015 Opinion or Order Filing 141 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Allison Claire on 5/12/2015 ORDERING that the portion of the 140 court's order filed earlier today, directing plaintiff to sumbit his proposed subpoenas, is PARTIALLY DISREGARDED. Within 14 days, plaintiff ma y submit his proposed subpoena duces tecum directed to HDSP, as authorized by the court, and as follows: (a) The Clerk of Court is directed to provide plaintiff, with a copy of this order, one subpoena duces tecum form, signed but otherwise blank, pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 45; (b) Within fourteen days, plaintiff may complete and return to the court the attached Notice of Submission of Documents form and the proposed subpoena duces tecum directed to HDSP. The court will hold plaintiff' ;s subpoenas duces tecum directed to SCIF and CSATF until expiration of the fourteen-day period, and thereafter direct the USM to serve those subpoenas and, if properly submitted, plaintiff's third subpoena directed to HDSP. No further extensions of time will be granted for completion of these matters. (Yin, K)
April 24, 2015 Opinion or Order Filing 133 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Allison Claire on 04/23/15 ORDERING that plaintiff and the Deputy Attorney General shall, within 14 days, file separate statements informing the court of plaintiff's current place of incarceration and, if ava ilable, the anticipated duration of that placement; plaintiff and counsel for all parties shall, within 28 days, file separate statements (each statement shall be no more than 5 pages in length, with no attached exhibits or supplemental filings) a s detailed in the order; the 06/01/15 dispositive motion deadline is VACATED; parties shall continue to provide any remaining discovery ordered by this court on 04/16/15, and plaintiff may submit the authorized subpoenas duces tecum for this court's review; plaintiff may file and serve a response to this court's 04/08/15 120 order; Clerk to serve plaintiff at both CSATF and HDSP. (Benson, A)
April 16, 2015 Opinion or Order Filing 126 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Allison Claire on 04/15/15 ordering plaintiff's motion 77 to extend the discovery deadline to conduct additional discovery is denied without prejudice until resolution of the parties' current discovery dis putes; similarly, plaintiff's motion to reopen discovery 95 is denied without prejudice. After resolution of all outstanding discovery matters, the court will inquire into the need for further discovery. Plaintiff's motion for an exten sion of time within which to file his opposition to defendants' motion for protective order 86 is granted nunc pro tunc. Defendants' motion 105 to strike plaintiff's surreply 99 is denied. Plaintiff's request for sanctions 99 is denied. Defendants' motion for protective order 58 concerning plaintiff's request for production of documents (set one)(request nos 1,3, 8,10-3,15-20,23,25-30,32-5,39 and 64, as narrowed by the parties) is granted in part and de nied in part as follows: a. Defendants' motion for a protective order is granted as to plaintiff's production request nos. 1,3,8,10-3,15-20,23,25-6,35 and 39; defendants are relieved from responding to these requests. However within 14 day s after the filing date of this order, defense counsel (Attorney General's Office) shall contact the CSATF Litigation Coordinator and make reasonable arrangements for plaintiff to review CDCR's IMSPP manual as described in plaintiff's request no. 16. b. Defendants' motion for a protective order is denied as to plaintiff's production request nos. 27-30, 32-4 and 64; defendants are required to respond to these requests, as construed by the court herein, within 21 days afte r the filing date of this order. Defendants' motion for protective order (motion to strike some defendants) 58 is also granted as to plaintiff's production request nos.21, 36-8, 70-1; these requests are limited to plaintiff's ADA cl aims and need be answered only be defendant Swingle within 21 days after the filing date of this order. Defendants' motion for a protective order 58 , as to plaintiff's all remaining request for production (set one) is denied as moot, pur suant to the parties; informal resolution of those matter and/or plaintiff's failure to object to defendants' motion. Plaintiff's request for extension of time to file his second subpoena duces tecum motion 76 is granted nunc pro tu nc. Plaintiff's second motion for issuance of subpoena duces tecum 80 is granted in part and denied in part; plaintiff may complete and submit to the court 3 separate proposed subpoenas for service by the U.S. Marshal, as narrowed herein as f ollows: a. The subpoenas duces tecum shall be directed respectively to SCIF, HDSP and CSATF, and the documents requested shall reflect the narrowed parameters identified by the court herein. b. The clerk of the court is directed to provide plaintiff with a copy of this order, 3 subpoena duces tecum forms, signed but otherwise blank, pursuant to FRCP 45. c. Within 14 days after the filing date of this order, plaintiff shall complete and return to the court the attached Notice of Submission of Do cuments form and the proposed subpoenas duces tecum. d. Should plaintiff fail to timely return the subpoena duces tecum forms, or complete them in a manner inconsistent with that authorized by the court herein, no further action will be taken by th e court on plaintiff's request for issuance of subpoenas duces tecum. Defendant Swingles' request for an extension of time to serve responses to plaintiff's request for admissions (set one) 83 is granted nunc pro tunc. Plaintiff� 39;s motion to file a second amended complaint 84 is denied; plaintiff's requests for additional time to file a reply to defendants' opposition to plaintiff's motion 96 , 110 are denied as moot. Plaintiff's motions to stay th is action 85 and 108 are denied; in addition, plaintiff's motion 97 to file a reply to defendants' opposition to plaintiff's first motion to stay is denied as moot. Plaintiff's motion for extension of time to reply to all o f defendants' motions 98 is denied as moot. Plaintiff's motion for appointment of counsel 102 is denied without prejudice; plaintiff's request for an extension of time 116 to file a reply to defendants' opposition is denied as moot. (Plummer, M)
January 27, 2015 Opinion or Order Filing 87 ORDER granting 82 Motion for Reconsideration signed by Chief Judge Morrison C. England, Jr on 1/26/15: This case is referred to the magistrate judge for consideration of the merits of Plaintiff's request. (Kaminski, H)
October 21, 2014 Opinion or Order Filing 73 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Allison Claire on 10/20/14 ordering plaintiff's 10/14/14 motions for a stay of the proceedings 70 , 71 are denied. Plaintiff is granted 60 days from the date of this order in which to file an opposition to th e motion for protective order. Accordingly, plaintiff's motion for a 21 days extension of time to oppose the motion for a protective order 72 is denied as moot. Plaintiff is ordered to file a status report 60 days from the date of this order notifying the court of whether or not his medical condition enables him to proceed with this lawsuit. (Plummer, M)
October 9, 2014 Opinion or Order Filing 66 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Allison Claire on 10/8/2014 GRANTING defendants' 64 motion and defendants may take plaintiff's deposition by video conference. (Yin, K)
September 29, 2014 Opinion or Order Filing 59 ORDER signed by Chief Judge Morrison C. England, Jr. on 9/26/2014 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 53 are ADOPTED in FULL; and Plaintiff's 39 Motion for immediate Injunctive Relief is DENIED. (Reader, L)
July 28, 2014 Opinion or Order Filing 53 ORDER AND FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Allison Claire on 7/28/2014 ORDERING that 45 the Findings and Recommendations issued on 6/17/2014 are hereby VACATED; IT IS FURTHER RECOMMENDED 39 that plaintiff's motion for immediate injunctive relief be denied for the reasons discussed herein; Referred to Judge Morrison C. England, Jr.; Objections due within 21 days after being served with these F & R's.(Reader, L)
July 24, 2014 Opinion or Order Filing 52 ORDER signed by Chief Judge Morrison C. England, Jr on 7/22/14 DENYING 50 Request for Reconsideration. (Meuleman, A)
June 17, 2014 Opinion or Order Filing 45 FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Allison Claire on 6/16/14 RECOMMENDING that plaintiff's motion for immediate injunctiverelief (ECF No. 39 ) be denied. Referred to Judge Morrison C. England, Jr.; Objections to F&R due within 21 days.(Dillon, M)
June 13, 2014 Opinion or Order Filing 43 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Allison Claire on 06/12/14 denying 42 Motion to temporarily unassign the undersigned from this action. (Plummer, M)
March 4, 2014 Opinion or Order Filing 32 ORDER signed by Chief Judge Morrison C. England, Jr. on 3/3/2014 ORDERING that the 24 Findings and Recommendations are ADOPTED IN FULL. Service is appropriate for Defendants Miranda, Mayes, Schmidt, Lee, Pomazal, Rofling, Lankford and Swingle. All other Defendants and claims are DISMISSED from this action. The Clerk of the Court shall send Plaintiff 8 (eight) USM-285 forms, one summons, an instruction sheet and a copy of the 23 First Amended Complaint filed 7/15/2013. Within thirty days from the date of this Order, Plaintiff shall complete the attached Notice of Submission of Documents and submit the service documents to the Court. (Zignago, K.)
December 10, 2013 Opinion or Order Filing 30 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Allison Claire on 12/10/13 ORDERING that Plaintiffs motion requesting clarification 27 is denied without prejudice tofiling formal objections to the courts August 28, 2013 Findings and Recommendations. Plaintiffs mo tion for leave to file a second amended complaint 28 is denied without prejudice. Plaintiffs motion to stay proceedings 29 is denied in part, and granted in part. To the extent that the motion seeks an extension of time to file objections to this courtsAugust 28, 2013 Findings and Recommendations, the motion is granted. Plaintiff shall file any objections within thirty days from the date of this order. (Dillon, M)
August 28, 2013 Opinion or Order Filing 24 FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Allison Claire on 8/27/2013 RECOMMENDING that service is appropriate for defendants Miranda, Mayes, Schmidt, Lee, Pomazal, Rofling, Lankford, and Swingle; this case proceed on the 23 first a mended complaint on plaintiff's claims for violations of the Eighth Amendment by each defendant named above, and on a claim under the ADA against defendant Swingle in his official capacity; and all other defendants and claims should be dismissed from this action. Referred to Judge Morrison C. England, Jr.; Objections due within 21 days. (Yin, K)
May 10, 2013 Opinion or Order Filing 22 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Allison Claire on 05/10/13 ordering plaintiff's ex parte application for temporary restraing order 6 is denied as moot. Plaintiff's motion for extension of time 20 is granted. Plaintiff shall file an amended complaint on or before 07/10/13. No further extensions of time will be granted. (Plummer, M)
February 7, 2013 Opinion or Order Filing 19 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Allison Claire on 02/06/13 granting in part 17 Motion for Extension of time. Plaintiff shall file an amended complaint on or before 4/10/13. (Plummer, M)
December 13, 2012 Opinion or Order Filing 13 ORDER DIRECTING MONTHLY PAYMENTS be made from Prison Account of Walter Howard White signed by Magistrate Judge Allison Claire on 12/12/12. CDC is to collect payments from plaintiff's account and forward to the clerk until the $350.00 filing fee is paid in full. Clerk to serve this order and a copy of plaintiff's IFP on the Director of CDC. Clerk to also serve Financial with a copy of this order. (cc: CDC Director and Financial)(Plummer, M)
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: White v. Smyers et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Walter Howard White
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: D. Smyers
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: S. Mulios
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: E. Jean Pierre
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: Olga Beregovskaya
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: M. Bobbala
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: M. Rahimi
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: A. Rotman
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: G. Otanez
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: L. Peters
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: Ken Clark
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: G. Martinez
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: A. Enenmo
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: R. Miranda
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: R. Mayes
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: L. R. Schmidt
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: B. Lee
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: Pomazal
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: D. Swingle
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: C. Young
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: D. Frazier
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: D. Garbutt
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: Utilization Management Team
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: M. Shea
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: Y. Aguila
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: C. Nules
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: G. Milliken
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: L. D. Zamora
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: Tyler
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: Lankford
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: Rofling
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?