Conservation Law Foundation, Inc. v. Shell Oil Products US et al
| Conservation Law Foundation, Inc. |
| Shell Oil Products US, Shell Oil Company, Shell Petroleum, Inc., Shell Trading (US) Company, Royal Dutch Shell plc and Motiva Enterprises LLC |
| 1:2017cv00396 |
| August 28, 2017 |
| US District Court for the District of Rhode Island |
| Providence Office |
| Providence |
| Lincoln D. Almond |
| William E. Smith |
| Environmental Matters |
| 33 U.S.C. ยง 1319 |
| 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
94
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER - Plaintiff's Motion to Compel (ECF No. 72) and Defendants' Cross-Motion for Protective Order (ECF No. 78) are both DENIED without prejudice. 72 Motion to Compel; 78 Motion for Protective Order. So Ordered by Magistrate Judge Lincoln D. Almond on 7/21/2022. (Noel, Jeannine)
|
|
Filing
89
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS recommending that Defendants' Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings (ECF No. 70) be DENIED. 70 MOTION for Judgment on the Pleadings filed by Shell Petroleum, Inc., Shell Oil Company, Shell Trading (US) Company. Objections to R&R due by 7/14/2022. So Ordered by Magistrate Judge Lincoln D. Almond on 6/30/2022. (Noel, Jeannine)
|
|
Filing
55
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER granting in part and denying in part 46 Motion to Dismiss. So Ordered by District Judge William E. Smith on 9/28/2020. (Jackson, Ryan)
|
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 Rhode Island 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.
