Pisano v. Restaurant Technologies, Inc.
| Pisano and James Pisano |
| Restaurant Technologies, Inc. |
| 2:2016cv00859 |
| April 25, 2016 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of California |
| Sacramento Office |
| Sacramento |
| Carolyn K Delaney |
| Morrison C England |
| Civil Rights: Jobs |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1332 |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on February 27, 2019. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 12
ORDER signed by District Judge Morrison C. England, Jr. on 2/26/2019 DISMISSING CASE with prejudice, pursuant to FRCP 41(a)(2), with each side to bear their own costs and attorneys' fees. CASE CLOSED(Reader, L)
|
| Filing 11 MINUTE ORDER (Text Only) issued by courtroom deputy for District Judge, Morrison C. England, Jr.: The Court received the Stipulation of Dismissal and Proposed Order (ECF No. 10). Pursuant to Local Rule 137(b), regarding the requirements for proper filing of a proposed order, you are required to email the proposed order (in Microsoft Word) to chambers in addition to filing the pdf version via the CM/ECF system. Pursuant to Local Rules 101 and 131(c), the definition for "signature", you may enter /s/ for signatures for all counsel. Please submit your proposed order today, in Microsoft Word format to: mceorders@caed.uscourts.gov. (Deutsch, S) |
| Filing 10 STIPULATION and PROPOSED ORDER for Dismissal by James Pisano. (Basham, Gary) |
|
Filing 9
STIPULATION and ORDER signed by District Judge Morrison C. England, Jr., on 6/26/17, ORDERING that all discovery, with the exception of expert discovery, shall be completed no later than 9/11/2017. Except as stated herein, the Initial Pretrial Scheduling Order issued on 4/25/2016, and Order to Modify Initial Pretrial Scheduling Order issued on 2/27/2017, will continue to govern this case. (Kastilahn, A)
|
| Filing 8 STIPULATION and PROPOSED ORDER for Continuance of Discovery Deadline by Restaurant Technologies, Inc. (Poper, Nicholas) |
|
Filing 7
STIPULATION and ORDER signed by District Judge Morrison C. England, Jr., on 2/27/17 ORDERING that all discovery, with the exception of expert discovery, shall be completed no later than 7/28/2017. Disclosure of expert witnesses shall be made not later than 60 days after the close of discovery (or 9/26/2017). Any party may designate a supplemental list of expert witnesses within 30 days after the designation of expert witnesses. The parties shall file dispositive motions no later than 180 days after the close of discovery (or 1/24/2018). Except as stated herein, the Initial Pretrial Scheduling Order issued on 4/25/2016, will continue to govern this case. (Kastilahn, A)
|
| Filing 6 STIPULATION and PROPOSED ORDER modifying the #2 Initial Pretrial Scheduling Order by Restaurant Technologies, Inc. (Poper, Nicholas) |
| Filing 5 NOTICE OF CHANGE OF ADDRESS by Gary R. Basham. (Basham, Gary) |
| Filing 4 JOINT STATUS REPORT by Restaurant Technologies, Inc.. (Jones, James) |
| Filing 3 CERTIFICATE of SERVICE by Restaurant Technologies, Inc. re #2 Civil New Case Documents for MCE. (Poper, Nicholas) |
| Filing 2 CIVIL NEW CASE DOCUMENTS ISSUED. (Attachments: #1 Consent Form, #2 VDRP) (Michel, G.) |
| Filing 1 NOTICE OF REMOVAL from Superior Court of California, County of Sacramento: case number 34-2016-00191224 by Restaurant Technologies, Inc. (Filing fee $400.00, receipt number 0972-6436684) (Attachments: #1 Exhibits A-C, #2 Civil Cover Sheet, #3 Corporate Disclosure Statement) (Poper, Nicholas) |
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 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.
