Process Controls International, Inc. v. Emerson Process Management et al
Plaintiff: |
Process Controls International, Inc. |
Defendant: |
Emerson Process Management, Factory Mutual Insurance Company and FM Approvals, LLC |
Case Number: |
4:2010cv00645 |
Filed: |
April 16, 2010 |
Court: |
US District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri |
Office: |
St. Louis Office |
County: |
St. Louis - County |
Nature of Suit: |
Antitrust |
Cause of Action: |
15 U.S.C. § 1 |
Jury Demanded By: |
Plaintiff |
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
Date Filed |
Document Text |
June 3, 2013 |
Filing
439
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER. (see order for details) IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that defendant's motion for judgment as a matter of law, or alternatively, for a new trial [# 425 ] is denied. Signed by District Judge Catherine D. Perry on 06/03/2013. (CBL)
|
October 22, 2012 |
Filing
304
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER: IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Emerson's motion for summary judgment [# 251 ] as to counts 5 and 6 of Emersons fourth amended counterclaim is denied. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Automation's motion for summary judgment [# 256 ] as to counts 17 of Emerson's fourth amended counterclaim is granted as to counts 5 and 6 only, and is denied in all other respects. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Emerson's motion for summary judgment [# 257 ] as to counts 911 of Automa tion's third amended complaint is granted. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Automation's motion for summary judgment [# 262 ] as to counts 14 of Factory Mutuals counterclaim is denied. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Automation's motion for summa ry judgment [# 264 ] as to count 8 of Emerson's fourth amended counterclaim is denied. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Factory Mutual's motion for summary judgment [# 266 ] as to counts 14 of Factory Mutual's counterclaim and count 12 of Automation's third amended complaint is granted. Signed by District Judge Catherine D. Perry on October 22, 2012. (BRP)
|
December 7, 2011 |
Filing
196
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER. (see order for details) IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that defendant Emerson's motion to dismiss [# 190 ] is denied as to Counts 9, 10, and 11 and is denied as moot as to Counts 13, 14, and 15. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that defendant FM Approval's motion to dismiss [# 188 ] is granted, and Counts 13 - 15 against it are dismissed with prejudice. Only Count 12 remains against this defendant. Signed by Honorable Catherine D. Perry on 12/7/2011. (CBL)
|
October 20, 2011 |
Filing
186
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER. (see order for details) IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the motion to compel [#137] is granted to the extent that Emerson must answer parts (a) and (d) of Interrogatory No. 6. Emerson must produce documents responsive to Interrogatory No. 13 and Request for Production No. 75 sufficient to show the tolerances relevant to Emerson's safety assertions. Automation's attorney may view the documents with an expert at Emerson's place of business. The motion to compel is de nied in all other respects. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the motion for sanctions [#143] is granted, but defendants' request for judgment or striking pleadings is denied. At trial Emerson is entitled to the adverse inference instruction described above, but Automation is entitled to attempt to rebut the adverse inference. Plaintiffs shall pay defendants reasonable attorneys' fees and expenses incurred in litigating the motion for sanctions. 137 143 Signed by Honorable Catherine D. Perry on 10/20/2011. (CBL)
|
May 10, 2011 |
Filing
127
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER: IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Fisher's motion for leave to file a First Amended Counterclaim [#96] is denied as moot. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Automation's motion to amend its Complaint [#101] is granted and denied in pa rt as described in this Memorandum and Order, and its proposed Second Amended Complaint [#101-1] is deemed filed as of this date with paragraphs 187, 195, 206, and 223 stricken from it. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Emerson's motion for leave to f ile a sur-reply [#105] is granted. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Automation's motion for a Protective Order [#107] is granted and denied in part, and a modified version of its second proposed Protective Order will be entered this same date as the Protective Order in this case. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Automation's motion for an Electronic Discovery Order [#109] is denied without prejudice; the parties are further ordered to meet and confer in person and in good faith in an effort to co me to their own agreement about electronic discovery. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Automation's motion to disqualify Glenn E. Davis and the Law Firm of Gallop, Johnson & Neuman, L.C. [#111] is granted. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Fisher's motion for leave to file a Second Amended Counterclaim [#115] is granted, and its Second Amended Counterclaim is deemed filed as of this date. Signed by Honorable Catherine D. Perry on 05/10/2011. (BRP)
|
February 1, 2011 |
Filing
99
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER -- IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that defendant Emersons motion to strike 56 portions of plaintiff Automations complaint is denied. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that plaintiff Automations motion to amend 62 is denied. IT I S FURTHER ORDERED that plaintiff Automations motion to amend 62 is denied. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that defendant Emersons request to amend its answer is granted, and its amended answer is deemed filed as of this date. IT IS FURTHER OR DERED that plaintiff Automatons motion to strike 70 is denied as moot. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that plaintiffs motion for extension of time 95 to amend is granted in part and denied in part, and the deadline for filing motions to amend the pleadings is extended to February 10, 2011. No other deadlines are extended, and responses to any pending motions are due by the dates set by Local Rule. Signed by Honorable Catherine D. Perry on 2/1/11. (KCM)
|
November 10, 2010 |
Filing
54
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER. IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that defendants Factory Mutual's and FM Approval's motion to dismiss [#27] is granted, and Automation's complaint against these defendants is dismissed with prejudice. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED th at defendant Emerson's motion to dismiss [#30] is granted in part to the extent that Counts I-VIII against it are dismissed with prejudice, and is denied as to the remaining counts. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that intervenor Fisher's motion to i ntervene [#32] is granted. The proposed counterclaim [#35] is deemed filed as of this date, and plaintiff is reminded of its obligation to file a responsive pleading within the time set by the Rules. Signed by Honorable Catherine D. Perry on November 10, 2010. (MGK)
|
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 Missouri Eastern 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?