Overstreet v. Air Traffic Management Consulting Inc.

Justia Dockets & Filings Ninth Circuit Nevada District Court Overstreet v. Air Traffic Management Consulting Inc.

Overstreet v. Air Traffic Management Consulting Inc.

Petitioner:	Cornele A. Overstreet
Respondent:	Air Traffic Management Consulting Inc.
Case Number:	2:2015cv01637
Filed:	August 25, 2015
Court:	US District Court for the District of Nevada
Office:	Las Vegas Office
Presiding Judge:	Jennifer A. Dorsey
Presiding Judge:	Nancy J. Koppe
Nature of Suit:	Labor: Labor/Mgt. Relations
Cause of Action:	29 U.S.C. § 160 (1) National Labor Relations Act
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
September 17, 2015	Filing 39 ORDER Granting 38 Stipulation of Dismissal with Prejudice. Signed by Judge Jennifer A. Dorsey on 9/16/2015. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - DC)
August 28, 2015	Filing 35 ORDER that 21 Petition for Temporary Injunction is DENIED without prejudice. FURTHER ORDERED that 29 Petitioner's Motion for Leave to File Excess Pages, 26 Motion for Order to Show Cause (which isn't a motion at all), 31 Motion to Try Petition, and 32 Motion for Expedited Hearing, are all DENIED. FURTHER ORDERED that 24 Petitioner's Memorandum of Points and Authorities in Support of Petition is STRICKEN. FINALLY, IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that petitioner must serve a copy of this order on the respondent immediately and then file a Notice of Service reflecting when and how that service was made. Signed by Judge Jennifer A. Dorsey on 8/28/15. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - MMM)

Date Filed

Document Text

September 17, 2015

Filing 39 ORDER Granting 38 Stipulation of Dismissal with Prejudice. Signed by Judge Jennifer A. Dorsey on 9/16/2015. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - DC)

August 28, 2015

Filing 35 ORDER that 21 Petition for Temporary Injunction is DENIED without prejudice. FURTHER ORDERED that 29 Petitioner's Motion for Leave to File Excess Pages, 26 Motion for Order to Show Cause (which isn't a motion at all), 31 Motion to Try Petition, and 32 Motion for Expedited Hearing, are all DENIED. FURTHER ORDERED that 24 Petitioner's Memorandum of Points and Authorities in Support of Petition is STRICKEN. FINALLY, IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that petitioner must serve a copy of this order on the respondent immediately and then file a Notice of Service reflecting when and how that service was made. Signed by Judge Jennifer A. Dorsey on 8/28/15. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - MMM)

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

Search for this case: Overstreet v. Air Traffic Management Consulting Inc.
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Respondent: Air Traffic Management Consulting Inc.
Represented By:	Gregory J Kamer
Represented By:	Nicole Ann Young
Represented By:	Carol Davis Zucker
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 ]
Petitioner: Cornele A. Overstreet
Represented By:	Nathan A. Higley
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?