Bergland v. Boeing Company, Inc.
| Cliff Berglund |
| Boeing Company, Inc |
| Neil J. Evans |
| 3:2002cv00193 |
| December 13, 2011 |
| US District Court for the District of Oregon |
| Portland Office |
| John V. Acosta |
| Other Statutory Actions |
| 31 U.S.C. ยง 3729 False Claims Act |
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
250
OPINION and ORDER - Based upon the foregoing, Boeing's Statement of Costs Pursuant to the Court's December 13 Order 236 , is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part as follows: Boeing is awarded attorney fees and costs in the amount of $74,964.50. IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated this 24th day of May, 2012, by U.S. Magistrate Judge John V. Acosta. (peg)
|
|
Filing
244
OPINION and ORDER - Based on the foregoing, Boeing's Bill of Costs 231 is GRANTED, in part and DENIED, in part. Total Costs Awarded $4,456.00. IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated this 29th day of February, 2012, by U.S. Magistrate Judge John V. Acosta. (peg)
|
|
Filing
226
OPINION and ORDER - Boeing's Motion for Summary Judgment 171 is DENIED; Boeing's Motion for Imposition of Sanctions 199 is GRANTED. Count Two of Berglund's TAC is DISMISSED, with prejudice, and JUDGMENT is entered for Boeing. Further , within 10 days of this Opinion and Order, Boeing must file with the court a detailed statement of its requested fees and costs for the monetary sanctions as set forth. IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated this 13th day of December, 2011, by U.S. Magistrate Judge John V. Acosta. (peg)
|
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 Oregon 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.
