Dobina v. Weatherford International Ltd. et al
| Mike Dobina |
| Charles E. Geer, Jr., Bernard J. Duroc-Danner, Andrew P. Becnel, Weatherford International Ltd. and Jessica Abarca |
| 1:2011cv01646 |
| March 9, 2011 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of New York |
| Foley Square Office |
| XX Out of State |
| Denise L. Cote |
| Securities/Commodities/Exchanges |
| 15 U.S.C. ยง 78 |
| Plaintiff |
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
235
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER denying as moot 220 Motion for Conference; granting in part and denying in part 221 Motion: For these reasons, the plaintiffs' motion to enforce (Docket no. 221) is granted in part and denied in part. The witness summari es discussed above shall be reviewed as described and produced to the plaintiffs within seven days of the date of this order. The defendants' motion for a conference (Docket no. 220) is denied as moot. (Signed by Magistrate Judge James C. Francis on 12/16/2013) Copies Mailed By Chambers. (tn)
|
|
Filing
207
ORDER granting in part and denying in part 177 Motion to Compel: For the reasons discussed above, the motion to compel additional document discovery (Docket no. 177) is granted to the extent that Weatherford shall produce all non-duplicative documents turned over to the SEC in response to Subpoenas 2 5, and is otherwise denied. (Signed by Magistrate Judge James C. Francis on 10/28/2013) Copies Mailed By Chambers. (tn)
|
|
Filing
198
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER granting in part 171 Motion for Discovery: For the reasons discussed above, the motion for leave to increase the deposition limit pursuant to Rule 30(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (Docket no. 171) is granted in part. The plaintiffs may conduct sixteen additional non-expert depositions. (Signed by Magistrate Judge James C. Francis on 10/24/2013) Copies Mailed By Chambers. (tn)
|
|
Filing
197
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER denying 191 Motion to Strike Document No. 189 .There has been a serious breakdown in the discovery process in this case, as evidenced by the multitude of discovery motions filed. Indeed, between September 20, 2013, and October 17, 2013, the parties have filed five such motions, including the motion to strike, and counsel for the defendants have indicated that another one is on its way. Counsel should know that this is an unsuitable manner in which to conduct litigation. S ee, e.g., Family Dollar Stores, Inc. v. United Fabrics International, Inc., No. 11 Civ. 2574, 2012 WL 1123736, at *9 (S.D.N.Y. April 4, 2012) (admonishing counsel for failure to cooperate in discovery). The defendants' motion to strike (Docket no. 191) is denied. (Signed by Magistrate Judge James C. Francis on 10/22/2013) Copies Mailed By Chambers. (lmb) Modified on 10/22/2013 (lmb).
|
|
Filing
161
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER granting 153 Motion to Compel. For the reasons discussed above, the defendant's motion to compel the plaintiffs' return of original Weatherford Rule 30(b) (6) transcripts so that errata sheets may be attached (Docket no. 153) is granted. (Signed by Magistrate Judge James C. Francis on 8/23/2013) Copies Mailed By Chambers. (lmb)
|
|
Filing
138
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER granting 129 Motion to Compel. For the reasons discussed above, the plaintiffs' motion to compel testimony (Docket no. 129) is granted. (Signed by Magistrate Judge James C. Francis on 5/28/2013) Copies Mailed By Chambers. (lmb)
|
|
Filing
103
MEMORANDUM OPINION: Accordingly, Ernst & Young's motion to dismiss the AC [DI 63] is granted. The Weatherford Defendants' motion to dismiss the AC [DI 67] is granted in all respects, except it is denied with respect to (1) the Section 10(b) claims against Becnel and Weatherford regarding statements about the quality of internal controls and (2) corresponding Section 20(a) claims against Duroc-Danner, Abarca, and Geer. AFME's motion for leave to supplement the complaint [DI 90] is denied, and its requests for judicial notice [DI 90; DI 101] are denied as moot. (Signed by Judge Lewis A. Kaplan on 11/7/2012) (ae)
|
|
Filing
45
OPINION AND ORDER: The June 27 and 28, 2011 motions for reconsideration of the June 27, 2011 Order are denied. (Signed by Judge Denise L. Cote on 7/6/2011) (jfe)
|
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 Southern 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.
