Nayak v. Voith Turbo Inc
Plaintiff: Sandeep Nayak
Defendant: Voith Turbo Inc
Case Number: 1:2014cv01053
Filed: June 2, 2014
Court: US District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania
Office: Harrisburg Office
County: York
Presiding Judge: Susan E. Schwab
Presiding Judge: Yvette Kane
Nature of Suit: Employment
Cause of Action: 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983
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
September 25, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 192 ORDER - IT IS ORDERED THAT: 1. Chief Magistrate Judge Schwabs Report and Recommendation 166 is ADOPTED; 2. Plaintiffs objections 181 , are OVERRULED; 3. Defendant Voiths motion [92} to dismiss Plaintiffs amended complaint is GRANTED; 4. Plaintiffs claims against Defendant Voith are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE; 5. The Clerk of Court is directed to TERMINATE Defendant Voith as a Defendant in this action; 6. Plaintiffs appeal/objection to Chief Magistrate Judge Schwabs July 19, 2017 Order (Doc. No. 182), is OVERRULED; and 7. This case is recommitted to Chief Magistrate Judge Schwab for further proceedings. Signed by Honorable Yvette Kane on 9/25/17. (rw)
March 7, 2016 Opinion or Order Filing 134 ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS - Plaintiffs objections (Doc. No. 107 ) are OVERRULED. Defendants motion to dismiss (Doc. No. 127 ) is GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART. The above-captioned action is referred back to Magistrate Judge Schwab for further pre-trial management. Signed by Honorable the Yvette Kane on March 7, 2016. (kjn)
April 9, 2015 Opinion or Order Filing 74 ORDER - IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT:1. Magistrate Judge Schwabs Report and Recommendation (Doc. No. 48) isADOPTED;2. Plaintiffs objections (Doc. No. 49) are OVERRULED;3. Defendants motion to dismiss (Doc. No. 14) is GRANTED IN PARTAND DENIED IN PART a s follows:a. Plaintiffs claims arising under Title VII, and his state law claimsfor breach of contract, fraud, wrongful termination and civilconspiracy, are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE;b. Plaintiffs state law claim for intentional infliction of emotiona ldistress is NOT DISMISSED;4. Plaintiffs first motion to invalidate the release agreement (Doc. No. 7) isDENIED;5. Plaintiffs motion to amend in order to file his proposed amendedcomplaint of August 8, 2014 (Doc. No. 28) is DENIED; 11. The case is re ferred back to Magistrate Judge Schwab for pre-trialmanagement, including resolution of any pending motions and, ifnecessary, a Report and Recommendation on same. 7 28 1 Complaint 36 14 60 48 36 Signed by Honorable Yvette Kane on 4/8/2015. SEE ORDER FOR MORE(sc)
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 Pennsylvania Middle District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Nayak v. Voith Turbo Inc
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Sandeep Nayak
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: Voith Turbo Inc
Represented By: Kelley E. Kaufman
Represented By: Adam Robert Long
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?