Saratoga Potato Chip Company Inc et al v. Classic Foods Inc et al
Plaintiff: |
Saratoga Potato Chip Company Inc and Saratoga Potato Chips LLC |
Defendant: |
Classic Foods Inc and Cuetara Holdings Inc |
Case Number: |
1:2012cv00452 |
Filed: |
December 20, 2012 |
Court: |
US District Court for the Northern District of Indiana |
Office: |
Fort Wayne Office |
County: |
Allen |
Presiding Judge: |
Roger B Cosbey |
Presiding Judge: |
Philip P Simon |
Nature of Suit: |
Contract: Other |
Cause of Action: |
28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Petition for Removal |
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 |
August 15, 2016 |
Filing
106
OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING 104 MOTION to Compel by Plaintiffs Saratoga Potato Chip Company Inc, Saratoga Potato Chips LLC. Defendant Balance Foods Inc ORDERED to supplement its answers and fully respond to Plaintiffs' First Set of Interrogatories and Requests for Production (DE [104-6]; [104-7]) by 8/29/2016 including, if necessary, filing an affidavit as described herein. Signed by Magistrate Judge Susan L Collins on 8/15/16. (cer)
|
December 9, 2015 |
Filing
98
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS of United States Magistrate Judge in their entirety for 91 Motion for Sanctions filed by Saratoga Potato Chip Company Inc, Saratoga Potato Chips LLC: Cuetara is the alter ego of Classic, as alleg ed in Count VI of the amended complaint; and Plaintiff is awarded expenses and fees in the amount of $3,420 against Classic and Cuetara, jointly and severally. The Court denies Plaintiffs motion in all other respects. Signed by Judge Joseph S Van Bokkelen on 12/9/15. (mc)
|
April 20, 2015 |
Filing
93
OPINION AND ORDER DENYING 89 RULE 12(f) MOTION to Strike 88 Reply to Response to Motion filed by Saratoga Potato Chip Company Inc, Saratoga Potato Chips LLC, DENYING 76 MOTION to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction or in the alternative Motion to Transfer the Case filed by Balance Foods Inc. Signed by Judge Joseph S Van Bokkelen on 4/20/2015. (lns)
|
October 9, 2014 |
Filing
85
OPINION AND ORDER: DENYING 80 MOTION to Withdraw as Attorney for Classic Foods, Inc. by Defendants Classic Foods Inc, Cuetara Holdings Inc. Signed by Magistrate Judge Roger B Cosbey on 10/9/2014. (lhc)
|
June 27, 2014 |
Filing
68
OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING 63 MOTION for Leave to File Amended Complaint filed by Saratoga Potato Chip Company Inc, Saratoga Potato Chips LLC (deemed by Court to be a motion to file a supplemental complaint). Portions of the supplemental complaint are STRICKEN as outlined in this Opinion and Order. Clerk DIRECTED to show Plas' proposed complaint as filed in accordance with this Order. Signed by Magistrate Judge Roger B Cosbey on 6/27/2014. (lns)
|
March 27, 2014 |
Filing
45
OPINION AND ORDER re 18 MOTION for Partial Summary Judgment by Plaintiffs Saratoga Potato Chip Company Inc, Saratoga Potato Chips LLC. The Motion is GRANTED for the enforcement of the Settlement Agreement and associated attorney's fees. Attorn ey's fees in the amount of $3,152.50 shall be paid by Defendants as outlined in Plaintiffs' Affidavit of Attorney's Fees (attached to the Motion for Partial Summary Judgment). The 33 MOTION for Judgment on the Pleadings filed by Cuetara Holdings Inc is DENIED. Signed by Judge Joseph S Van Bokkelen on 3/27/14. (cer)
|
December 21, 2012 |
Filing
7
OPINION AND ORDER: Defendants to file Amended Notice of Removal on or before 1/4/2013 as outlined. Signed by Magistrate Judge Roger B Cosbey on 12/21/12. (Additional attachment(s) added on 12/21/2012: # 1 Main Document) (lhc). Modified on 12/21/2012 (lns).
|
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 Indiana Northern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
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?