Denholm et al v. AWP, Inc.
Plaintiff: Matthew T. Denholm and National Labor Relations Board
Defendant: AWP, Inc.
Case Number: 2:2020cv00608
Filed: September 15, 2020
Court: US District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia
Presiding Judge: Irene C Berger
Nature of Suit: Labor: Other
Jury Demanded By: None
Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on October 13, 2020. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
October 13, 2020 Opinion or Order Filing 22 ORDER dismissing without prejudice the #1 Petition for Preliminary Injunction Under Section 10(j) of the National Labor Relations Act as Amended. This case is STRICKEN from the docket of the Court, and all pending motions are TERMINATED as moot. Signed by Judge Irene C. Berger on 10/13/2020. (cc: counsel of record and any unrepresented party) (arb)
October 13, 2020 Filing 21 STIPULATION/MOTION by Matthew T. Denholm, National Labor Relations Board to Dismiss Without Prejudice #1 Petition. (Attachment: #1 Proposed Order)(Duffey, Jonathan) (Modified on 10/14/2020 to add link to #1 petition) (ts).
October 8, 2020 Filing 20 REPLY by Matthew T. Denholm, National Labor Relations Board to #17 Memorandum In Opposition, and #18 , #19 Objections (Duffey, Jonathan)
October 1, 2020 Filing 19 OBJECTIONS by AWP, Inc. to Affidavits attached to #1 PETITION by Matthew T. Denholm, National Labor Relations Board for Preliminary Injunction by AWP, Inc. (Bailey, Gene) (Modified on 10/2/2020 to remove link to #2 memorandum) (kew).
October 1, 2020 Filing 18 OBJECTIONS by AWP, Inc. to Declarations attached to #1 PETITION by Matthew T. Denholm, National Labor Relations Board for Preliminary Injunction by AWP, Inc. (Bailey, Gene) (Modified on 10/2/2020 to remove link to #2 memorandum) (kew).
October 1, 2020 Filing 17 MEMORANDUM by AWP, Inc. in opposition to #1 PETITION by Matthew T. Denholm, National Labor Relations Board for Preliminary Injunction (Bailey, Gene)
October 1, 2020 Filing 16 ANSWER TO #1 Petition by AWP, Inc. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit 1, #2 Exhibit 1 Continued, #3 Exhibit 1 Continued, #4 Exhibit 2, #5 Exhibit 2 Continued, #6 Exhibit 2 Continued, #7 Exhibit 3, #8 Exhibit 4, #9 Exhibit 5, #10 Exhibit 6, #11 Exhibit 7, #12 Exhibit 8, #13 Exhibit 8 Continued)(Bailey, Gene) (Modified on 10/2/2020 to add link to #1 petition) (kew).
September 28, 2020 Opinion or Order Filing 15 ORDER granting #14 MOTION of AWP, Inc. to File Memorandum in Response to Petitioner's Memorandum in Support of the Petition in Excess of 20 Pages and that the memorandum not exceed thirty (30) pages. Signed by Judge Irene C. Berger on 9/28/2020. (cc: counsel of record; any unrepresented party) (msa)
September 25, 2020 Filing 14 MOTION by AWP, Inc. for Leave to File Memorandum in Response to #1 Petition in Excess of 20 Pages. (Bailey, Gene) (Modified on 9/28/2020 to add link to #1 petition) (kew).
September 21, 2020 Filing 13 EXHIBIT 14 (thumb drive) by Matthew T. Denholm, National Labor Relations Board in support of #1 PETITION by Matthew T. Denholm, National Labor Relations Board for Preliminary Injunction. (Thumb drive maintained in the Office of the Clerk of Court.) (kew)
September 18, 2020 Filing 12 STATEMENT OF VISITING ATTORNEY from Harry I. Johnson, III on behalf of AWP, Inc. Local counsel: Gene W. Bailey, II. Fee $50.00. Receipt # AWVSDC-7742286. (Bailey, Gene)
September 18, 2020 Filing 11 STATEMENT OF VISITING ATTORNEY from T. Merritt Bumpass, Jr. on behalf of AWP, Inc. Local counsel: Gene W. Bailey, II. Fee $50.00. Receipt # AWVSDC-7742275. (Bailey, Gene)
September 18, 2020 Filing 10 STATEMENT OF VISITING ATTORNEY from Carl H. Gluek on behalf of AWP, Inc. Local counsel: Gene W. Bailey, II. Fee $50.00. Receipt # AWVSDC-7742265. (Bailey, Gene)
September 18, 2020 Opinion or Order Filing 9 ORDER granting #7 REQUEST by AWP, Inc. for Reconsideration of the #6 Order; the Defendant is directed to file a response and answer by 10/1/2020; the Plaintiff is directed to file any reply within seven days thereafter. Signed by Judge Irene C. Berger on 9/18/2020. (cc: counsel of record; any unrepresented party) (kew)
September 18, 2020 Filing 8 RESPONSE by Matthew T. Denholm, National Labor Relations Board in opposition to #7 REQUEST by AWP, Inc. for Reconsideration of the #6 Order (Attachments: #1 Exhibit 1, #2 Exhibit 2, #3 Exhibit 3, #4 Exhibit 4)(Duffey, Jonathan) (Modified on 9/21/2020 to add party filer) (kew).
September 18, 2020 Filing 7 REQUEST by AWP, Inc. for Reconsideration of the #6 Order. (Attachment: #1 Exhibit A)(Bailey, Gene) (Modified on 9/18/2020 to convert event to motion) (kew).
September 17, 2020 Opinion or Order Filing 6 ORDER directing that the Respondent submit any responsive briefing to the #1 PETITION by Matthew T. Denholm, National Labor Relations Board for Preliminary Injunction by 9/24/2020, and that the petitioner file any reply within seven days thereafter. Counsel for Petitioner is directed to ensure that this Order is promptly served on the Respondent. Signed by Judge Irene C. Berger on 9/16/2020. (cc: counsel of record; any unrepresented party) (lca)
September 16, 2020 Filing 5 ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER FOR ASSIGNMENT AND REFERRAL TO MAGISTRATE JUDGES OF CIVIL ACTIONS ASSIGNED TO JUDGE IRENE C. BERGER ENTERED NOVEMBER 12, 2019. This matter referred to Magistrate Judge Aboulhosn for Discovery. (cc: attys; any unrepresented party) (klc)
September 15, 2020 CASE assigned to Judge Irene C. Berger. (klc)
September 15, 2020 Filing 4 PROPOSED ORDER Order Granting Preliminary Injunction by Matthew T. Denholm, National Labor Relations Board. (kew)
September 15, 2020 Filing 3 PROPOSED ORDER Order to Show Cause by Matthew T. Denholm, National Labor Relations Board. (kew)
September 15, 2020 Filing 2 MEMORANDUM by Matthew T. Denholm, National Labor Relations Board in support of #1 PETITION by Matthew T. Denholm, National Labor Relations Board for Preliminary Injunction. (kew)
September 15, 2020 Filing 1 PETITION by Matthew T. Denholm, National Labor Relations Board for Preliminary Injunction. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit 1, #2 Exhibit 2, #3 Exhibit 3, #4 Exhibit 4, #5 Exhibit 5, #6 Exhibit 6, #7 Exhibit 7, #8 Exhibit 8, #9 Exhibit 9, #10 Exhibit 10, #11 Exhibit 11, #12 Exhibit 12, #13 Exhibit 13, #14 Exhibit 14, #15 Exhibit 15, #16 Exhibit 16, #17 Exhibit 17, #18 Certificate of Service, #19 Civil Cover Sheet) (kew)

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 West Virginia Southern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Denholm et al v. AWP, Inc.
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Matthew T. Denholm
Represented By: Jonathan D. Duffey
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 ]
Plaintiff: National Labor Relations Board
Represented By: Jonathan D. Duffey
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: AWP, Inc.
Represented By: Carl H. Gluek
Represented By: Harry Isaac Johnson, III
Represented By: Gene W. Bailey, II
Represented By: T. Merritt Bumpass, Jr.
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?