Imbarrato et al v. Banta Management Services, Inc. et al
| Patrick Imbarrato and Nick Praino |
| Banta Management Services, Inc., Banta BWW MDT, LLC, Banta Nine Mall LLC, Banta BWW ON, LLC, Banta BWW NB, LLC, George E. Banta Sr. and George E. Banta Jr. |
| 7:2018cv05422 |
| June 15, 2018 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of New York |
| White Plains Office |
| New York |
| Nelson Stephen Roman |
| Fair Labor Standards Act |
| 29 U.S.C. ยง 201 |
| 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
64
ORDER: The parties shall meet and confer prior to the Telephone Conference scheduled for September 21, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. to develop a proposed discovery Plan and Scheduling Order, and e-mail the completed form to McCarthy_NYSDChambers@nys d.uscourts.gov at least five days prior to the scheduled conference. In the absence of an agreement, the Court will implement its own discovery plan after hearing from counsel. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Magistrate Judge Judith C. McCarthy on 5/10/2022) (vfr)
|
|
Filing
60
OPINION & ORDER re: 54 MOTION to Certify Class . filed by Patrick Imbarrato, Nick Praino. For the foregoing reasons, Plaintiffs' motion for conditional certification of the FLSA collective action, approval of the proposed not ices, and request for discovery is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. The parties are directed to contact Magistrate Judge Judith C. McCarthy within 7 days of this Opinion & Order regarding production of discovery on an expedited basis. The Clerk of the Court is respectfully directed to terminate the motion at ECF No. 54. (Signed by Judge Nelson Stephen Roman on 4/25/2022) (ate)
|
|
Filing
51
ORDER. In order to facilitate the progress of pre-trial discovery of this litigation in a just, speedy and inexpensive manner, to ensure compliance with the case management plan, and to prevent the accumulation of unresolved discovery issues, the fol lowing procedures will be followed for the resolution of discovery disputes: The party objecting to disclosure, claiming an insufficient response to a discovery request or asserting a privilege bears the burden of coming forward by bringing the dispute to the attention of the Court as hereinafter set forth, and as further specified and set forth in this Order. So ordered. (Signed by Magistrate Judge Judith C. McCarthy on 2/2/2021) (rjm)
|
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.
