Lennear, et al v. Diamond Pet Food Processors of California, LLC et al
| Leland Lennear and Narvell Henry, Sr. |
| Diamond Pet Food Processors of California, LLC, Diamond Pet Food Processors of Ripon, LLC and Schell & Kampeter, Inc. |
| 2:2013cv01871 |
| September 9, 2013 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of California |
| Sacramento Office |
| San Joaquin |
| Dale A. Drozd |
| Troy L. Nunley |
| Other Civil Rights |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1331 |
| 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
105
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Carolyn K. Delaney on 6/2/16 ORDERING that Defendants' 5/3/16 Motion for Reconsideration 84 is GRANTED; and Defendants are granted 30 days from the date of this order to conduct the IME at issue. (Mena-Sanchez, L)
|
|
Filing
83
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Carolyn K. Delaney on 4/28/16: The parties' discovery disagreement 81 and Motion to file documents under seal 82 are denied without prejudice to renewal. (Kaminski, H)
|
|
Filing
80
ORDER CLARIFYING THE COURT'S AMENDED SCHEDULING ORDER, signed by District Judge Troy L. Nunley on 3/30/16, ORDERING that the Joint Final Pretrial Conference Statement is due one week prior to the Joint Final Pretrial Conference, making it due on or before January 5, 2017. (Kastilahn, A)
|
|
Filing
77
AMENDED PRETRIAL SCHEDULING ORDER signed by District Judge Troy L. Nunley on 3/14/16: Supplemental discovery responses due by 3/18/2016. Dispositive Motions filed by 6/17/2016. Final Pretrial Conference set for 1/12/2017 at 02:00 PM in Courtroom 2 (TLN) before District Judge Troy L. Nunley. Jury Trial set for 3/27/2017 at 09:00 AM in Courtroom 2 (TLN) before District Judge Troy L. Nunley. (Kaminski, H)
|
|
Filing
72
ORDER signed by District Judge Troy L. Nunley on 11/24/15: The Court hereby GRANTS Defendants' Motion to Dismiss 25 ; GRANTS Plaintiff's Motion to Amend the Complaint 61 ; DISMISSES Defendants' Motions for Summary Judgement as MOOT 29 , 33 ; DENIES Defendants' Motion to Strike as MOOT 51 and DENIES Defendants' Motion to Disqualify Counsel 51 . The deadline for filing dispositive motions is hereby VACATED. (Kaminski, H)
|
|
Filing
43
STIPULATION and ORDER 42 to re-set Motions Hearings signed by District Judge Troy L. Nunley on 2/24/2015. Defendants' 29 Motion to Dismiss and parties' 25 33 Motions for Summary Judgment / Motion to Dismiss Hearing is ADVANCED to 4/9/2015 at 9:30 AM in Courtroom 2 (TLN). (Marciel, M)
|
|
Filing
40
STIPULATION and ORDER signed by District Judge Troy L. Nunley on 2/12/15 ORDERING that the Pretrial Scheduling Order is AMENDED and the Motion Hearing Schedule DEADLINE is moved from 3/12/15 to 4/23/15. (Kastilahn, A)
|
|
Filing
24
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Dale A. Drozd on 12/19/14 DENYING 21 Motion to Compel save and except to the extent of the representations made by defense counsel on the record at the 12/19/14 hearing with respect to the discovery responses already provided. (Manzer, C)
|
|
Filing
20
STIPULATION and ORDER signed by District Judge Troy L. Nunley on 10/30/2014 ORDERING the Discovery Deadline EXTENDED to 12/22/2014. (Donati, J)
|
|
Filing
18
STIPULATION AND ORDER signed by District Judge Troy L. Nunley on 7/3/2014 CONTINUING the deadline for the completion of discovery to 11/20/214; CONTINUING the deadline for the designation of expert witnesess to 12/17/2014. (Michel, G)
|
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.
