Ho v. Bayer Corp

Case Number: 1:2006cv07012
Filed: December 19, 2006
Court: Illinois Northern District Court
Office: Chicago Office
Presiding Judge: John F. Grady
Nature of Suit: Other Statutory Actions
Cause of Action: 28:1331 Federal Question
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
July 15, 2009 32 Opinion or Order of the Court MEMORANDUM Opinion and Order signed by the Honorable John F. Grady on 7/14/2009: The defendants renewed motion to dismiss the Taiwan plaintiffs on grounds of forum non conveniens is allowed.The parties may prepare and submit to the court by July 28, 2009 a proposed judgment order, similar to the other forum non conveniens judgment orders we have entered in this litigation, containing the usual protective provisions, and providing for (1) the dismissal of the claim of the plaintiff Chen-Chen Huang, with prejudice, as time-barred, and (2) the dismissal of the contract claims of the remaining plaintiffs on the ground of forum non conveniens, without prejudice to refiling in Taiwan. Mailed notice(jlj, )
March 26, 2009 27 Opinion or Order of the Court MEMORANDUM Opinion and Order Signed by the Honorable John F. Grady on 3/26/2009.(mjc, )
January 14, 2009 19 Opinion or Order of the Court MEMORANDUM Opinion and Order Signed by the Honorable John F. Grady on 1/14/2009.(mjc, )

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 Illinois Northern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Ho v. Bayer Corp
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?