Eugene Sanders v. Old Dominion Freight Line, Inc
Petitioner: OLD DOMINION FREIGHT LINE, INC.
Respondent: EUGENE SANDERS, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated
Case Number: 17-80017
Filed: February 13, 2017
Court: U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
Nature of Suit: Other
Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on May 18, 2017. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
May 18, 2017 Filing 6 Filed order (WILLIAM C. CANBY and RICHARD R. CLIFTON): We construe petitioners petition for rehearing en banc (Docket Entry No. [ # 5 ]) as a motion for reconsideration en banc. So construed, the motion is denied on behalf of the court. See 9th Cir. R. 27-10; 9th Cir. Gen. Ord. 6.11. No further filings will be entertained in this closed case. [10440227] (AF) [Entered: 05/18/2017 01:56 PM]
March 15, 2017 Filing 5 Filed (ECF) Petitioner Old Dominion Freight Line, Inc. motion for reconsideration of dispositive Judge Order of 03/01/2017. Date of service: 03/15/2017. [10358240]--[COURT ENTERED FILING to correct entry [4].] (SLM) [Entered: 03/15/2017 03:59 PM]
March 15, 2017 Filing 4 COURT DELETED INCORRECT ENTRY. Notice about deletion sent to case participants registered for electronic filing. Correct Entry: [ # 5 ]. Original Text: Filed (ECF) Petitioner Old Dominion Freight Line, Inc. petition for rehearing en banc (from 03/01/2017 memorandum). Date of service: 03/15/2017. [10357842] [17-80017] (Kane, Matthew) [Entered: 03/15/2017 02:25 PM]
March 1, 2017 Filing 3 Filed order (WILLIAM C. CANBY and RICHARD R. CLIFTON): The petition for permission to appeal pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1453(c) is denied. See Coleman v. Estes Express Lines, Inc., 627 F.3d 1096, 1100 (9th Cir. 2010) (per curiam). The urgent motion to stay the district courts remand order (Docket Entry No. [ # 2 ] ) is denied as moot. DENIED. [10338909] (AF) [Entered: 03/01/2017 02:55 PM]
February 13, 2017 Filing 2 Filed (ECF) Petitioner Old Domionion Freight Line, Inc. Urgent Motion to stay lower court action. Date of service: 02/13/2017. [10318121] [17-80017] (Kane, Matthew) [Entered: 02/13/2017 04:58 PM]
February 13, 2017 Filing 1 FILED ON 02/13/2017 PETITION FOR PERMISSION TO APPEAL PURSUANT TO RULE 1453(c). SERVED ON 02/13/2017. [10317727] (BY) [Entered: 02/13/2017 03:11 PM]

Access additional case information on PACER

Access the Case Summary and Docket Report to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.

Search for this case: Eugene Sanders v. Old Dominion Freight Line, Inc
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Respondent: EUGENE SANDERS, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated
Represented By: Aparajit Bhowmik Esquire
Represented By: Norman B. Blumenthal
Represented By: Kyle R. Nordrehaug
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 ]
Petitioner: OLD DOMINION FREIGHT LINE, INC.
Represented By: Sabrina Alexis Beldner Esquire
Represented By: Matthew Kane
Represented By: Sylvia Kim
Represented By: Brian David Schmalzbach
Represented By: John Arthur Van Hook
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?