NGUYEN v. AK STEEL CORPORATION
TUNG NGUYEN |
AK STEEL CORPORATION |
2:2008cv01320 |
September 22, 2008 |
US District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania |
Civil Rights: Jobs Office |
Butler |
Lisa Pupo Lenihan |
Plaintiff |
Federal Question |
42:2000e Job Discrimination (Employment) |
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
Document Text |
---|
Filing 42 MEMORANDUM AND OPINION re 20 MOTION for Summary Judgment filed by AK STEEL CORPORATION. Signed by Magistrate Judge Lisa Pupo Lenihan on 8/25/2010. (clh) |
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 Western 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
Search for this case: NGUYEN v. AK STEEL CORPORATION | |
---|---|
Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
Plaintiff: TUNG NGUYEN | |
Represented By: | John W. Murtagh |
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: AK STEEL CORPORATION | |
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.