Watts v. Metropolitan Life Insurance Company et al

Case Number: 3:2009cv00829
Filed: April 20, 2009
Court: California Southern District Court
Office: Labor: E.R.I.S.A. Office
Referring Judge: Jan M. Adler
Presiding Judge: William Q. Hayes
Nature of Suit: None
Cause of Action: Federal Question
Jury Demanded By: 29:1001 E.R.I.S.A.: Employee Retirement

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed#Document Text
October 7, 2010 68 Opinion or Order of the Court ORDER: Plaintiff's (Doc. 50 ) Second Application to File Documents Under Seal and Defendants' (Doc. 60 ) Motion to Maintain Status of Confidential Documents Previously Produced to Plaintiff Under Confidentiality Order are granted. Plaintiffs may file Exhibits 6-8 under seal in support of any motion or trial brief. Signed by Judge William Q. Hayes on 10/7/2010. (mdc)
July 28, 2010 56 Opinion or Order of the Court ORDER: Plaintiff's (Doc. 50 ) Second Application to File Documents Under Seal or in the Alternative to Designate Documents as Not Confidential remains pending before the Court. MetLife may file a motion to seal the documents within twenty-one days of the date of this order. In the event that MetLife fails to file a motion to seal, the Court will permit Plaintiff to file the documents as part of the public record. Signed by Judge William Q. Hayes on 7/28/2010. (mdc)

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 Southern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Watts v. Metropolitan Life Insurance Company et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ 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?