Tracey et al v. Massachusetts Institute of Technology et al
| David Tracey, Daniel Guenther, Maria Nicholson, Corrinne Fogg and Vahik Minaiyan |
| Massachusetts Institute of Technology, The MIT Supplemental 401(K) Plan Oversight Committee, The Administrative Committee, Israel Ruiz, Marc Bernstein, Glenn David Ellison, S.P. Kothari, Gunther Roland, Lorraine Goffe-Rush, Glen Shor, Pamela Weldon, Thomas Wieand and Barton Zwiebach |
| 1:2016cv11620 |
| August 9, 2016 |
| US District Court for the District of Massachusetts |
| Boston Office |
| Middlesex |
| Nathaniel M. Gorton |
| Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1132 |
| Plaintiff |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
274
Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton: ORDER entered. MEMORANDUM AND ORDER granting in part, and denying, in part 204 Motion for Summary Judgment. A pre-trial conference will be held on Wednesday, September 11 at 11:00 AM and the bench trial will commence on Monday, September 16 at 9:00 AM.(Lima, Christine)
|
|
Filing
232
Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton: ORDER entered. MEMORANDUM AND ORDER: For the foregoing reasons, plaintiffs' motion for leave to file a third amended complaint (Docket No. 193 ) is DENIED.So ordered. (Vieira, Leonardo)
|
|
Filing
187
Magistrate Judge Marianne B. Bowler: ORDER entered. MEMORANDUM AND ORDER Re: Defendants' Motion to Strike Plaintiffs' Demand for a Jury Trial (Docket Entry # 138 ). MIT's motion to strike (Docket Entry # 138 ) is ALLOWED.(Patton, Christine)
|
|
Filing
157
Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton: MEMORANDUM AND ORDER entered. For the foregoing reasons, plaintiffs motion to certify the class (Docket No. 94 ) is ALLOWED. So ordered(McDonagh, Christina)
|
|
Filing
79
Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton: ENDORSED ORDER entered. MEMORANDUM AND ORDERFor the foregoing reasons,1) plaintiffs objections to the Report and Recommendation (R&R) (Docket No. 74) are OVERRULED;2) defendants objections to the R&R that a) plaintiffs claim in Count III pursuant to § 1106(a)(1)(D) should be dismissed and b) plaintiffs duty-to-monitor claim in Count IV pursuant to § 1106(a)(1)(D) should be dismissed are SUSTAINED; and3) the R&R (Docket No. 70) is otherwise accepted and adopted.So ordered.(Caruso, Stephanie)
|
|
Filing
75
Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton: ENDORSED ORDER entered adopting in part Report and Recommendations re 70 Report and Recommendations. See attached order. (Caruso, Stephanie)
|
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
- 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.
