Zhang v. UnitedHealth Group et al
| Yufan Zhang |
| UnitedHealth Group and Sujatha Duraimanickam |
| 0:2018cv01454 |
| May 25, 2018 |
| US District Court for the District of Minnesota |
| DMN Office |
| Carver |
| Michael J. Davis |
| Katherine M. Menendez |
| Employment |
| 29 U.S.C. ยง 621 |
| 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
63
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER. IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff's Motion to Vacate the Arbitration Award 42 is DENIED. This matter is hereby dismissed with prejudice. LET JUDGMENT BE ENTERED ACCORDINGLY. (Written Opinion) Signed by Judge Michael J. Davis on 4/26/2021. (GRR)
|
|
Filing
41
ORDER in Response to E-mail re: 39 Order setting briefing schedule. The deadlines set by the November 18th Order are modified. Motions to vacate, modify, or correct arbitration award due by 1/6/2021. Responses due by 1/27/2021. Motions to confi rm arbitration award must be filed on or before 10/6/2021. The Court encourages Defendants to consider filing any motion to confirm sooner and in conjunction with a response to any motion to vacate, modify, or correct the award. See Order for details. (Written Opinion) Signed by Magistrate Judge Katherine M. Menendez on 12/10/2020. (BJP)
|
|
Filing
28
ORDER granting 16 Motion to Compel Arbitration. This action is STAYED pending arbitration.(Written Opinion) Signed by Judge Michael J. Davis on 2/13/2019. (CFD)
|
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 Minnesota 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.
