Moore v. Innovative Systems, LLC
Paul B. Moore, Jr. |
Innovative Systems, LLC |
5:2016cv00851 |
October 13, 2016 |
US District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina |
Western Division Office |
WILSON |
James C. Dever |
Employment |
29 U.S.C. ยง 621 |
Plaintiff |
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
Document Text |
---|
Filing 18 CONSENT CONFIDENTIALITY AND PROTECTIVE ORDER (as Modified) - Signed by United States Magistrate Judge James E. Gates on 6/12/2017. (Briggeman, N.) |
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
Search for this case: Moore v. Innovative Systems, LLC | |
---|---|
Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
Plaintiff: Paul B. Moore, Jr. | |
Represented By: | William P. Barrett |
Represented By: | Joshua M. Krasner |
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: Innovative Systems, LLC | |
Represented By: | Thomas Cullen Stafford |
Represented By: | Kyle Richard Still |
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.