Muftic v. Prism Technologies LLC

Muftic v. Prism Technologies LLC

Plaintiff:	Sead Muftic
Defendant:	Prism Technologies LLC
Case Number:	8:2009cv00355
Filed:	October 5, 2009
Court:	US District Court for the District of Nebraska
Office:	8 Omaha Office
County:	Douglas
Presiding Judge:
Presiding Judge:	Joseph F. Bataillon
Presiding Judge:	Thomas D. Thalken
Nature of Suit:	None
Cause of Action:	28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Breach of Contract
Jury Demanded By:	None

Follow case documents by RSS

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed	Document Text
May 17, 2010	Filing 45 PROTECTIVE ORDER granting 26 Motion for Protective Order; granting 32 Amended Motion for Protective Order. Ordered by Magistrate Judge Thomas D. Thalken. (TRL)
May 4, 2010	Filing 36 ORDER - The defendant's Motion to Seal Exhibit in Support of Prism's Motion for Entry of Protective Order 25 is granted to the extent the Clerk of Court shall amend the entry for Exhibit 1 of the defendant's Index of Evidence 28 an d change the designation from SEALED to RESTRICTED pursuant to NECivR 5.0.3 and court procedures. The plaintiff's Motion to Remove the Plaintiff's Complaint from the Open Docket and File Under Seal 30 is granted to the extent the Clerk o f Court shall change the designation to RESTRICTED and place the Complaint (Filing No. 1) under restricted access pursuant to NECivR 5.0.3 and court procedures. The Clerk of Court shall amend the entry for the defendant's Answer to Complaint and Counterclaims (Filing No. 14) and change the designation from SEALED to RESTRICTED pursuant to NECivR 5.0.3 and court procedures. Ordered by Magistrate Judge Thomas D. Thalken. (KBJ)

Date Filed

Document Text

May 17, 2010

Filing 45 PROTECTIVE ORDER granting 26 Motion for Protective Order; granting 32 Amended Motion for Protective Order. Ordered by Magistrate Judge Thomas D. Thalken. (TRL)

May 4, 2010

Filing 36 ORDER - The defendant's Motion to Seal Exhibit in Support of Prism's Motion for Entry of Protective Order 25 is granted to the extent the Clerk of Court shall amend the entry for Exhibit 1 of the defendant's Index of Evidence 28 an d change the designation from SEALED to RESTRICTED pursuant to NECivR 5.0.3 and court procedures. The plaintiff's Motion to Remove the Plaintiff's Complaint from the Open Docket and File Under Seal 30 is granted to the extent the Clerk o f Court shall change the designation to RESTRICTED and place the Complaint (Filing No. 1) under restricted access pursuant to NECivR 5.0.3 and court procedures. The Clerk of Court shall amend the entry for the defendant's Answer to Complaint and Counterclaims (Filing No. 14) and change the designation from SEALED to RESTRICTED pursuant to NECivR 5.0.3 and court procedures. Ordered by Magistrate Judge Thomas D. Thalken. (KBJ)

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 Nebraska District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Muftic v. Prism Technologies LLC
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Plaintiff: Sead Muftic
Represented By:	Scott E. Daniel
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Finance	[ Google Finance \| Yahoo Finance \| Hoovers \| SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Justia Dockets \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Defendant: Prism Technologies LLC
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Finance	[ Google Finance \| Yahoo Finance \| Hoovers \| SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Justia Dockets \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]

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?