Prezio Health Inc. v. Schenk et al
Plaintiff: Prezio Health Inc.
Defendant: John Schenk and Spectrum Surgical Instruments Corp.
Case Number: 3:2013cv01463
Filed: October 4, 2013
Court: US District Court for the District of Connecticut
Office: New Haven Office
County: XX US, Outside State
Presiding Judge: Warren W. Eginton
Nature of Suit: Other Contract
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 1332
Jury Demanded By: None

Available Case Documents

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

Date Filed Document Text
April 6, 2016 Opinion or Order Filing 98 CORRECTED ORDER re 94 Order on Motion for Summary Judgment (removing errant "an" from last full sentence on page 7 and errant quotation mark from Minnesota Mining citation on page 8). Signed by Judge Warren W. Eginton on 4/6/16.(Ladd-Smith, I.)
March 22, 2016 Opinion or Order Filing 94 ORDER granting in part and denying in part 72 Motion for Summary Judgment. Counts I and III, breach of contract and tortious interference with contractual relations are dismissed; Count II, pursuant to CUTSA, remains. Signed by Judge Warren W. Eginton on 3/22/2016. (Ladd-Smith, I.)
January 11, 2016 Opinion or Order Filing 87 RULING granting, to the extent set forth in the attached ruling, plaintiff's 81 Motion for Sanctions (see attached). Signed by Judge Joan G. Margolis on 1/11/2016. (Malone, A.)
September 9, 2015 Opinion or Order Filing 80 RULING Following In Camera Review (see attached).Signed by Judge Joan G. Margolis on 09/09/2015.(Malone, A.)
August 25, 2015 Opinion or Order Filing 77 RULING granting in part 68 Plaintiff's Motion to Compel to the extent that an in camera review is ordered, which depending on the content of the documents, may be followed by production of the metadata. Defendants shall submit the specified documents to this Magistrate Judge's Chambers on or before September 4, 2015. (See attached). Signed by Judge Joan G. Margolis on 8/25/2015. (Watson, M.)
April 13, 2015 Opinion or Order Filing 62 RULING (see attached): 46 Defendants' Motion to Compel is denied without prejudice to renew after April 24, 2015, as appropriate. Signed by Judge Joan G. Margolis on 4/13/2015. (Watson, M.)
October 3, 2014 Opinion or Order Filing 40 RULING granting in part and denying as moot in part 33 Motion to Compel Depositions and Discovery Responses, as set forth in the attached ruling. Signed by Judge Holly B. Fitzsimmons on 10/3/2014. (Katz, Samantha)
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 Connecticut District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Prezio Health Inc. v. Schenk et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Prezio Health Inc.
Represented By: James T. Shearin
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 ]
Defendant: John Schenk
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 ]
Defendant: Spectrum Surgical Instruments Corp.
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?