Burkhart v. Leasure et al
| WILLIAM NOBLE BURKHART |
| ROBERT W LEASURE, BETH A TAYLOR, GREGORY C DAVIS, RICHARD A JOHNSON, JOHN E SAGARTZ, R. MATTHEW NEFF, NIGEL BROWN, SCOTT CRAGG, INOTIV, INC., Robert W Leasure, Jr, Beth A. Taylor, Gregory C. Davis, Richard A. Johnson and John E. Sagartz |
| 4:2023cv00003 |
| January 4, 2023 |
| US District Court for the Northern District of Indiana |
| Joshua P Kolar |
| Philip P Simon |
| Securities/Commodities |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on May 8, 2023. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 7
ORDER: The Joint Motion To Stay Burkhart Action, Coordinate Actions, And Appoint Co -Lead Counsel #6 is GRANTED IN PART with relief different than requested. This action is STAYED pending further order of the Court. Plaintiff's request to appoint Co-Lead Counsel and Liaison Counsel is DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. The request to coordinate this action with the Burkhart Derivative Action is GRANTED. The parties are ORDERED to file a joint status report regarding the Inotiv Securities Class Action, 4:22-cv-45, and any other relevant or related matters on or before 7/5/2023 or within seven (7) days of a ruling on the pending motion to dismiss in the Inotiv Securities Class Action, whichever is earliest. Signed by Magistrate Judge Joshua P Kolar on 5/8/2023. (rmf)
|
| Filing 6 Joint MOTION to Stay Burkhart Action, Coordinate Actions, and Appoint Co-Lead Counsel by Plaintiff William Noble Burkhart. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A - RLF Resume, #2 Exhibit B - GPM Resume)(Catlin, Brad) |
|
Filing 5
OPINION AND ORDER: The parties are directed to meet and confer regarding the filing of a motion to stay and after meeting and conferring, the parties shall either file an agreed motion to stay or request a telephonic status conference if they are unable to reach agreement regarding the stay. The Clerk is directed to enter this opinion and order in both 4:22-cv-00064-PPS-JPK and 4:23-cv-00003-PPS-JPK. Signed by Magistrate Judge Joshua P Kolar on 2/17/23. (nal)
|
| Filing 4 NOTICE by William Noble Burkhart (Notice of Non-Opposition to the Joint Motion Consolidating Actions and Appointing Co-Lead Counsel) (Catlin, Brad) |
| Filing 3 Summons Issued as to Nigel Brown, Scott Cragg, Gregory C. Davis, Inotive, Inc., Richard A. Johnson, Robert W Leasure, Jr, R. Matthew Neff, John E. Sagartz, Beth A. Taylor. NOTE:The attached document is accessible by court personnel only. Summons forms that were electronically submitted to the court for issuance will be returned to counsel via e-mail. (Attachments: #1 Cragg, #2 Davis, #3 Inotive, #4 Johnson, #5 Leasure, #6 Neff, #7 Sagartz, #8 Taylor)(ash) |
| Judge Philip P Simon and Magistrate Judge Joshua P Kolar added. **NEW CASE** (ash) |
| Filing 2 NOTICE of Appearance by Brad A Catlin on behalf of WILLIAM NOBLE BURKHART (Catlin, Brad) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT with JURY DEMAND against NIGEL BROWN, SCOTT CRAGG, GREGORY C DAVIS, INOTIV, INC., RICHARD A JOHNSON, ROBERT W LEASURE, R. MATTHEW NEFF, JOHN E SAGARTZ, BETH A TAYLOR( Filing fee $ 402 receipt number AINNDC-5120362.), filed by WILLIAM NOBLE BURKHART. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet, #2 Proposed Summons Leasure Summons, #3 Proposed Summons Taylor Summons, #4 Proposed Summons Davis Summons, #5 Proposed Summons Johnson Summons, #6 Proposed Summons Sagartz Summons, #7 Proposed Summons Neff Summons, #8 Proposed Summons Brown Summons, #9 Proposed Summons Cragg Summons, #10 Proposed Summons Inotiv Summons)(Catlin, Brad) |
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
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
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.
