Seastrunk v. Entegris Inc

Seastrunk v. Entegris Inc

Plaintiff:	Reginald D Seastrunk
Defendant:	Entegris Inc
Case Number:	3:2016cv02795
Filed:	September 30, 2016
Court:	US District Court for the Northern District of Texas
Office:	Dallas Office
County:	Dallas
Presiding Judge:	Sam A Lindsay
Nature of Suit:	Other Civil Rights
Cause of Action:	28 U.S.C. § 1331
Jury Demanded By:	Plaintiff

Follow case documents by RSS

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed	Document Text
September 10, 2018	Filing 69 ORDER ACCEPTING 59 FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE. (Ordered by Judge Karen Gren Scholer on 9/10/2018) (sss)
December 15, 2017	Filing 25 MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER denying without prejudice 17 Motion to Compel Production of Information and Documents. The Court will grant Plaintiff Reginald Seastrunk until January 4, 2018 to file a response explaining why the Court should not enter an order requiring him or his counsel to pay Defendant Entegris, Inc., as required by Rule 37(a)(5)(B), the expenses, including attorneys' fees, that Entegris incurred in drafting and filing its Objection and Response to Plaintiff's Motion to Compel [Dkt. No. 22 ]. Entegris, may file a reply in support of an award of expenses under Rule 37(a)(5)(B) by January 18, 2018. (Ordered by Magistrate Judge David L. Horan on 12/15/2017) (mcrd)

Date Filed

Document Text

September 10, 2018

Filing 69 ORDER ACCEPTING 59 FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE. (Ordered by Judge Karen Gren Scholer on 9/10/2018) (sss)

December 15, 2017

Filing 25 MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER denying without prejudice 17 Motion to Compel Production of Information and Documents. The Court will grant Plaintiff Reginald Seastrunk until January 4, 2018 to file a response explaining why the Court should not enter an order requiring him or his counsel to pay Defendant Entegris, Inc., as required by Rule 37(a)(5)(B), the expenses, including attorneys' fees, that Entegris incurred in drafting and filing its Objection and Response to Plaintiff's Motion to Compel [Dkt. No. 22 ]. Entegris, may file a reply in support of an award of expenses under Rule 37(a)(5)(B) by January 18, 2018. (Ordered by Magistrate Judge David L. Horan on 12/15/2017) (mcrd)

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 Texas Northern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Seastrunk v. Entegris Inc
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Plaintiff: Reginald D Seastrunk
Represented By:	Jane Legler Byrne
Represented By:	Christine Neill
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: Entegris Inc
Represented By:	Michael H Bell
Represented By:	Andrew Jason Magid
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?