Acosta v. Neurological Care P.C. et al
| R. Alexander Acosta |
| Michael Amoashiy, Sofia Amoashiy and Neurological Care P.C. |
| 1:2017cv03931 |
| June 30, 2017 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of New York |
| Brooklyn Office |
| Carol Bagley Amon |
| Cheryl L. Pollak |
| Labor: Fair Standards |
| 29 U.S.C. ยง 201 Fair Labor Standards Act |
| None |
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
29
ORDER granting in part and denying in part 25 : Defendants shall provide discovery or a letter explaining their inability to meet the deadline by 3/16/2018. Also by that date, defendants shall provide a letter indicating the search terms th ey used to locate responsive documents, the e-mail addresses searched, and the identity of the third-party vendor providing discovery services. Furthermore, defendants' counsel is Ordered to contact the vendor to ensure that the documents which are identified in response to any search are provided to counsel in the first instance and at the same time such documents may be produced to the client. This Order is binding on the vendor, and defendants' counsel is directed to serve a copy of the Order on the vendor within five (5) days. The parties shall contact the Court to schedule a settlement conference. So Ordered by Magistrate Judge Cheryl L. Pollak on 2/28/2018. (Caggiano, Diana)
|
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 New York Eastern 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.
