Savovic v. GES Consulting Services, LLC et al
| Joseph Savovic |
| GES Consulting Services, LLC and William S. Short |
| 5:2018cv00033 |
| February 26, 2018 |
| US District Court for the Western District of North Carolina |
| Statesville Office |
| Catawba |
| David Keesler |
| Frank D. Whitney |
| Patent |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1338 |
| 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
35
ORDER granting 34 Joint Motion to Stay Lawsuit Pending Settlement. Stipulation of Dismissal or a Consent Judgment due by 1/3/2020. All other deadlines in this case, including trial, are STAYED until otherwise ordered by the Court. Signed by Magistrate Judge David Keesler on 5/22/2019. (nvc)
|
|
Filing
31
ORDER granting 30 Joint MOTION for Extension of Time of Scheduling Order Deadlines (Discovery due by 4/3/2019, Mediation deadline set for 4/18/2019, Motions due by 5/2/2019 and Trial set for 10/7/2019). Denying without prejudice 24 MOTION to Dismiss. Signed by Magistrate Judge David Keesler on 11/13/2018. (nvc)
|
|
Filing
19
ORDER granting 17 MOTION to Amend Complaint and denying as moot 4 MOTION to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction. Amended Complaint due by 5/21/2018. Signed by Magistrate Judge David Keesler on 5/16/2018. (nvc)
|
|
Filing
16
ORDER granting 8 Motion for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice added Brent D. Hockaday for GES Consulting Services, LLC,Brent D. Hockaday for William S. Short. Signed by Magistrate Judge David Keesler on 4/24/2018. (nvc)
|
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
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.
