Gundlach v. International Business Machines Inc. et al
Plaintiff: Frederick W. Gundlach
Defendant: John Doe or Jane Does, International Business Machines Inc., IBM Japan Ltd. and Cognos K.K.
Case Number: 7:2011cv00846
Filed: February 7, 2011
Court: US District Court for the Southern District of New York
Office: White Plains Office
County: XX Out of State
Presiding Judge: Cathy Seibel
Nature of Suit: Employment
Cause of Action: 42 U.S.C. ยง 2000
Jury Demanded By: Plaintiff

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed Document Text
November 21, 2013 Opinion or Order Filing 86 OPINION AND ORDER: Defendants' Motion to Dismiss is GRANTED. The Clerk of Court is directed to terminate this Motion, (Doc. 75), and close the case. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Cathy Seibel on 11/21/2013) The Clerks Office Has Mailed Copies. (lnl)
May 1, 2012 Opinion or Order Filing 53 OPINION AND ORDER: Defendant IBM US's Motion is granted, and Defendant IBM Japan's Motion is denied without prejudice to possible renewal after jurisdictional discovery. The Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to terminate the pending Motions, (Docs. 31,33). As stated above, Plaintiff shall have 14 days from the date of this Order to advise whether he wishes to assert diversity jurisdiction. If he does, he shall file a second amended complaint conforming to this Opinion and Order within 21 days thereafter. In addition, the parties have recently submitted a series of letters to the Court raising a discovery dispute. If Plaintiff advises that he wishes to pursue the case by asserting diversity jurisdiction, the case will be r eferred to Magistrate Judge Paul E. Davison to address that issue, and to supervise the limited jurisdictional discovery authorized by this Opinion and Order. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Cathy Seibel on 5/1/2012) The Clerks Office Has Mailed Copies. (lnl)
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 Southern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Gundlach v. International Business Machines Inc. et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: John Doe or Jane Does
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: International Business Machines Inc.
Represented By: Allan S. Bloom
Represented By: Erin Elizabeth Laruffa
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: IBM Japan Ltd.
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: Cognos K.K.
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 ]
Plaintiff: Frederick W. Gundlach
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?