DePuy Orthopaedics, Inc. v. Gault South Bay, Inc. et al
| DePuy Orthopaedics, Inc. |
| Gault South Bay, Inc. and Robert Gault |
| 5:2007cv05897 |
| November 20, 2007 |
| US District Court for the Northern District of California |
| San Jose Office |
| Santa Clara |
| James Ware |
| Richard Seeborg |
| Contract: Other |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1331 Fed. Question: Breach of Contract |
| 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
4
ORDER Setting Case Management Conference re re 3 Order REFERRING CASE FOR RELATED CASE DETERMINATION. The Motion Hearing in C 07-04659 JW Gault South Bay, Inc. et al v. DePuy Orthopaedics, Inc. set for 12/3/2007 is VACATED. The Court sets a Case M anagement Conference in C 07-04659 Gault South Bay, Inc. et al v. DePuy Orthopaedics, Inc. AND C 07-05897 RS DePuy Orthopaedics, Inc. v. Gault South Bay, Inc. et al. for 12/3/2007 at 9:30 AM. The parties need not file a joint case management statemen t as required by the Civil Local Rules. Case Management Conference set for 12/3/2007 09:30 AM Courtroom 8, 4th Floor, San Jose before Hon. James Ware. Please see Order for further specifics. Signed by Judge James Ware on 11/28/2007. (ecg, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/28/2007)
|
|
Filing
3
ORDER REFERRING CASE FOR RELATED CASE DETERMINATION. Signed by Judge Richard Seeborg on 11/26/07. (rssec, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/26/2007)
|
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 Northern 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.
