Wong v. Roanoke Companies Group, Inc. et al
| 1:2006cv01485 |
| July 31, 2006 |
| US District Court for the District of Colorado |
| Denver Office |
| Marcia S. Krieger |
| Michael J. Watanabe |
| Personal Inj. Prod. Liability |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1332 Diversity-Product Liability |
| Both |
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
136
ORDER granting 135 Plaintiff and Defendants Stipulated Motion to Dismiss With Prejudice, with each party to bear its own costs and fees. by Chief Judge Wiley Y. Daniel on 10/26/2010.(erv, )
|
|
Filing
133
ORDER granting 132 Defendants Innovative Chemical Technologies, Inc., and Ortec, Inc.s Stipulated Motion to Dismiss with Prejudice. Defendant Ortecs cross-claims against Defendant Innovative Chemical Technologies, Inc. are hereby DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE, with each party to bear its own costs and fees. by Chief Judge Wiley Y. Daniel on 10/19/2010.(erv, )
|
|
Filing
127
MINUTE ORDER granting 123 Defendant Ortec, Inc.'s, Unopposed Motion to be Excused from Settlement Conference, by Magistrate Judge Michael E. Hegarty on 8/27/2010. (mehcd)
|
|
Filing
121
MINUTE ORDER granting 116 Defendant Innovative Chemical Technologies, Inc.s Unopposed Motion to be Excused from Settlement Conference. Defendant Innovative Chemicals is excused from participating in the Settlement Conference scheduled to occur August 30 and 31, and September 14 and 15, 2010, in this case. by Magistrate Judge Michael E. Hegarty on 8/26/2010.(erv, )
|
|
Filing
113
ORDER OF DISMISSAL granting 112 Stipulated Motion for Dismissal. All claims against Defendant Innovative Chemical Technologies, Inc. are hereby DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE, with each party to bear their own costs and attorneys' fees, by Chief Judge Wiley Y. Daniel on 08/04/2010.(wjc, )
|
|
Filing
105
MINUTE ORDER granting 103 Defendant Aerofil Technology Inc.'s Unopposed Motion to Vacate and Reset the Settlement Conference set for 9/7/2010. Settlement Conference set for 8/30/2010, 8/31/2010, 9/14/2010, and 9/15/2010 at 8:30 AM each day in Courtroom C203 before Magistrate Judge Michael E. Hegarty. Settlement Conference set for 9/8/2010 is VACATED. By Magistrate Judge Michael E. Hegarty on 6/25/2010. (mehcd)
|
|
Filing
64
CONDITIONAL ORDER OF REMAND from the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation pursuant to 28 USC 1407 (a), filed on 01/07/2010. This case has been remanded from the Northern District of Georgia. (sah, )
|
|
Filing
12
ORDER denying without prejudice 11 Motion to Stay Proceedings PPending Transfer Decision. Signed by Judge Marcia S. Krieger on 8/15/06. (erv, )
|
|
Filing
10
ORDER REGARDING CUSTODY OF EXHIBITS AND DEPOSITIONS IT IS ORDERED that, within 30 days after judgment is entered, counsel for the partiesshall obtain from the Court any exhibits and depositions used during this case. Counsel shallretain same for 60 d ays beyond the later of the time to appeal or conclusion of all appellateproceedings. Failure to retrieve the exhibits and depositions in this matter in conformance withthis Order may result in their destruction.. Signed by Judge Marcia S. Krieger on 8/8/06. (erv, )
|
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 Colorado 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
| Search for this case: Wong v. Roanoke Companies Group, Inc. et al | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | 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.
