ARMSTRONG TELECOMMUNICATIONS, INC. v. CHR SOLUTIONS, INC
Plaintiff: ARMSTRONG TELECOMMUNICATIONS, INC.
Defendant: CHR SOLUTIONS, INC
Case Number: 2:2018cv00787
Filed: June 15, 2018
Court: US District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania
Office: Pittsburgh Office
County: Butler
Presiding Judge: Maureen P. Kelly
Nature of Suit: Other Contract
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 1332
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
November 5, 2020 Opinion or Order Filing 162 OPINION and ORDER re 144 MOTION to Deposit Funds Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 67 filed by ARMSTRONG TELECOMMUNICATIONS, INC. indicating that the Court will permit the escrow deposit of Armstrong's funds. In addition, it is also ORD ERED that upon Armstrong's deposit of funds pursuant to a separately filed Order of Court permitting said deposit, any contract interest accruals upon said funds will cease as against CHR's counterclaim in this matter. Signed by Judge Marilyn J. Horan on 11/05/2020. (rtw)
August 7, 2019 Opinion or Order Filing 108 OPINION re Third-Party Defendants Virginia Gardea's and Vantage Point Solutions, Inc.'s 92 MOTION TO DISMISS CHR Solutions, Inc.'s Second Amended Third-Party Claims, indicating that said Motion will be granted in part, and denied in part. Signed by Judge Marilyn J. Horan on 8/7/19. (rtw)
April 25, 2019 Opinion or Order Filing 85 ORDER denying, without prejudice, CHR's 81 Motion to Compel Discovery from Third-Party Defendant, Vantage Point Solutions, Inc. Counsel are directed to continue to communicate to resolve issues and modify timelines for discovery as necessary for the circumstances of this case. If counsel are not able to resolve discovery issues by consent agreement, upon motion of any party, a discovery status conference will be scheduled. Signed by Judge Marilyn J. Horan on 4/25/19. (rtw)
April 24, 2019 Opinion or Order Filing 84 MEMORANDUM OPINION & ORDER granting, without prejudice, 70 the Third-Party Defendants' MOTION TO DISMISS FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM filed by VIRGINIA GARDEA and VANTAGE POINT SOLUTIONS, INC. CHR is granted leave to file Second Amended Third-Party Claims no later than May 24, 2019. The Motion to Dismiss CHR's claim for attorneys' fees is GRANTED, and said claim is hereby dismissed, with prejudice. Signed by Judge Marilyn J. Horan on 4/24/19. (rtw)
December 20, 2018 Opinion or Order Filing 65 ORDER granting 46 Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim as to Third-Party Defendants. CHR Solutions, Inc. is afforded opportunity to file its Amended Complaint on or before January 22, 2019. Signed by Judge Marilyn J. Horan on 12/20/2018. (bjl)
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 Western District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: ARMSTRONG TELECOMMUNICATIONS, INC. v. CHR SOLUTIONS, INC
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: ARMSTRONG TELECOMMUNICATIONS, INC.
Represented By: Ingrid A. Bohme
Represented By: Kevin C. Harkins
Represented By: Cezanne S. Harrer
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: CHR SOLUTIONS, INC
Represented By: Kyle Black
Represented By: Pete Patterson
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?