Martin v. Designatronics Inc. et al
Wayne Martin |
Designatronics Inc., Dyson, Dyson & Dunn, Inc. and Robert Kufner |
2:2017cv04907 |
August 21, 2017 |
US District Court for the Eastern District of New York |
Central Islip Office |
Denis R. Hurley |
A. Kathleen Tomlinson |
Civil Rights: Jobs |
42 U.S.C. ยง 1981 Civil Rights |
Plaintiff |
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
Document Text |
---|
Filing 47 ORDER granting in part and denying in part 43 Motion to Dismiss: Defendant Dyson's motion to dismiss pursuant Rule 12(b)(2) for lack of personal jurisdiction is denied. Defendant Dyson's motion to dismiss pursuant to Rule 12(b)(5) for in sufficient service of process is granted unless Plaintiff effects proper service on Dyson and files an affidavit of service on or before March 8, 2019. Defendants' joint Rule 12(b)(6) motion for failure to state a claim is granted as to the Tit le VII claim against Defendant Kufner but denied as to all the remaining claims. Finally, Defendants' joint motion to dismiss pursuant to Rule 12(h)(3) for lack of subject matter jurisdiction is denied in its entirety. See attached Order. Ordered by Judge Denis R. Hurley on 2/7/2019. (Bochner, Francesca) |
Filing 46 Minute Order for proceedings held before Magistrate Judge A. Kathleen Tomlinson: Hearing on plaintiff's motion to compel 41 on November 19, 2018. Granting in part and denying in part 41 Motion to Compel. SEE ATTACHED ORDER. Ordered by Judge A. Kathleen Tomlinson on 11/19/18. (Tomlinson, A.) |
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.