Patrick Collins, Inc.
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
|Date Filed||#||Document Text|
|March 28, 2013
Judge George A. OToole, Jr: ORDER entered adopting Report and Recommendations re (52) Report and Recommendations. in case 1:12-cv-10532-GAO; adopting Report and Recommendations re (45) Report and Recommendations. in case 1:12-cv-10758-GAO Associated Cases: 1:12-cv-10532-GAO, 1:12-cv-10758-GAO(Lyness, Paul)
|November 7, 2012
Ch. Magistrate Judge Leo T. Sorokin: ORDER entered. Order on Pending Motions for Ex Parte Discovery and Order to Show Cause. For the foregoing reasons, the Plaintiffs' Renewed Motions for Ex Parte Discovery (12-cv-10805-NMG, Docket # 43; 12-cv- 10532-GAO, Docket # 43; and, 12-cv-10758-GAO, Docket# 37) are DENIED. It is further ORDERED that by the close of business on November 16, 2012, the Plaintiffs shall show cause why their cases should not be dismissed pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(m) for failure to effect timely service. See attached Order. (Chernetsky, James)
|August 22, 2012
Ch. Magistrate Judge Leo T. Sorokin: MEMORANDUM AND ORDER entered regarding Motions To Quash and Sever (Docket #s 9, 10, 12, 15, 17, 24 and 26). On August 10, 2012, the Court quashed the subpoenas at issue, indicating that this memorandum would issue at a subsequent date. See Docket # 36. To the extent that the Plaintiff wishes to file renewed motions for early discovery, it shall do so as described herein by the close of business on September 10, 2012. See attached Report and Recommendations. (Chernetsky, James)
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 Massachusetts 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?