Shappley v. Amedica
Plaintiff: Ben R. Shappley
Defendant: Amedica
Case Number: 2:2011cv01198
Filed: December 22, 2011
Court: US District Court for the District of Utah
Office: Central Office
County: Salt Lake
Presiding Judge: Dee Benson
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
August 29, 2012 Opinion or Order Filing 56 MEMORANDUM DECISION granting 44 Motion to Compel. Within fourteen (14) days of the date of this order, Shappley shall fully respond to Amedicas Interrogatory No. 15 and Request for Production No. 17. Signed by Magistrate Judge Paul M. Warner on 08/29/2012. (asp)
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 Utah District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Shappley v. Amedica
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Ben R. Shappley
Represented By: Gregory W. Stevens
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: Amedica
Represented By: Richard F. Ensor
Represented By: Jennifer B. Rubin
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?