Micro System Engineering, Inc. v. Universal Instruments Corporation

Justia Dockets & Filings Second Circuit New York Northern District Micro System Engineering, Inc. v. Universal Instruments Corporation

Micro System Engineering, Inc. v. Universal Instruments Corporation

Plaintiff:	Micro System Engineering, Inc.
Defendant:	Universal Instruments Corporation
Case Number:	3:2013cv01144
Filed:	September 13, 2013
Court:	US District Court for the Northern District of New York
Office:	Binghamton Office
County:	Broome
Presiding Judge:	David E. Peebles
Presiding Judge:	Thomas J. McAvoy
Nature of Suit:	Other Contract
Cause of Action:	28 U.S.C. § 1332
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
April 11, 2017	Filing 15 SUMMARY ORDER - That MSEI and MTA's 230 Motion for Reconsideration is DENIED (from Lead Case 3:13-cv-831). Signed by Senior Judge Gary L. Sharpe on 4/11/2017.(jel, )
February 24, 2017	Filing 10 MEMORANDUM-DECISION and ORDER - ORDERED that MSEI and MTAs motion to strike (Dkt. No. 107) is DENIED; and it is further ORDERED that MSEI and MTA's motion for judgment on the pleadings (Dkt. No. 80) is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN P ART as follows: GRANTED with respect to claims of unjust enrichment, unfair competition, and promissory estoppel against MSEI; and DENIED in all other respects; and it is further ORDERED that MSEI and MTA's motion to dismi ss (Dkt. No. 97) is DENIED AS MOOT; and it is further ORDERED that MSEI and MTA's motion for summary judgment (Dkt. No. 196) is DENIED; and it is further ORDERED that Universal's cross motion for partial summary judgment (Dkt. No. 209) is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART as follows: GRANTED with respect to MSEI's complaint in the member case; and it is further DENIED in all other respects; and it is further ORDERED that MSEI's complaint (Dkt. No. 1, 3:13-cv-1144) in the member case is DISMISSED; and it is further ORDERED that this case is deemed trial ready and the court, in due course, shall issue a trial scheduling order; and it is further ORDERED that the parties shall advise the court of their joint position regarding sealing within seven (7) days of the date of this Memorandum-Decision and Order. In particular, the joint submission shall address whether the parties are of the opinion that sealing is req uired, if so, why, and whether a redacted version of the Memorandum-Decision and Order, and precisely what those redactions would be, can be made available to the public; and it is further ORDERED that the Clerk provide a copy of this Memorandum-Decision and Order to the parties. IT IS SO ORDERED. Signed by Senior Judge Gary L. Sharpe on 2/24/2017. (jel, )

Date Filed

Document Text

April 11, 2017

Filing 15 SUMMARY ORDER - That MSEI and MTA's 230 Motion for Reconsideration is DENIED (from Lead Case 3:13-cv-831). Signed by Senior Judge Gary L. Sharpe on 4/11/2017.(jel, )

February 24, 2017

Filing 10 MEMORANDUM-DECISION and ORDER - ORDERED that MSEI and MTAs motion to strike (Dkt. No. 107) is DENIED; and it is further ORDERED that MSEI and MTA's motion for judgment on the pleadings (Dkt. No. 80) is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN P ART as follows: GRANTED with respect to claims of unjust enrichment, unfair competition, and promissory estoppel against MSEI; and DENIED in all other respects; and it is further ORDERED that MSEI and MTA's motion to dismi ss (Dkt. No. 97) is DENIED AS MOOT; and it is further ORDERED that MSEI and MTA's motion for summary judgment (Dkt. No. 196) is DENIED; and it is further ORDERED that Universal's cross motion for partial summary judgment (Dkt. No. 209) is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART as follows: GRANTED with respect to MSEI's complaint in the member case; and it is further DENIED in all other respects; and it is further ORDERED that MSEI's complaint (Dkt. No. 1, 3:13-cv-1144) in the member case is DISMISSED; and it is further ORDERED that this case is deemed trial ready and the court, in due course, shall issue a trial scheduling order; and it is further ORDERED that the parties shall advise the court of their joint position regarding sealing within seven (7) days of the date of this Memorandum-Decision and Order. In particular, the joint submission shall address whether the parties are of the opinion that sealing is req uired, if so, why, and whether a redacted version of the Memorandum-Decision and Order, and precisely what those redactions would be, can be made available to the public; and it is further ORDERED that the Clerk provide a copy of this Memorandum-Decision and Order to the parties. IT IS SO ORDERED. Signed by Senior Judge Gary L. Sharpe on 2/24/2017. (jel, )

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 New York Northern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Micro System Engineering, Inc. v. Universal Instruments Corporation
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Plaintiff: Micro System Engineering, Inc.
Represented By:	Jeffrey S. Baker
Represented By:	Joseph F. Castiglione
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: Universal Instruments Corporation
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?