Thiesing et al v. Dentsply International Inc
| Timothy M Thiesing and American Orthodontics Corporation |
| Dentsply International Inc |
| 2:2009cv00359 |
| April 6, 2009 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin |
| Contract: Other Office |
| XX US, Outside State |
| J P Stadtmueller |
| None |
| Diversity |
| 28:1332 Diversity-Petition for Removal |
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
91
DECISION & ORDER FOLLOWING BENCH TRIAL signed by Magistrate Judge William E Callahan, Jr on 9/7/11. NOW THEREFORE IT IS ORDERED that the plaintiffs motion to exclude Marc Katzs testimony and report as they relate to the issue of damages be and hereb y is DENIED AS MOOT; IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the plaintiffs motion to strike or, in the alternative, for leave to file a post-trial surreply be and hereby is GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART; IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that GAC and Dentsply shall take nothing from Thiesing and AO on their counterclaims; IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this action be DISMISSED. (cc: all counsel) (kah)
|
|
Filing
60
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge William E Callahan, Jr on 9/28/10 denying plaintiffs' 39 Motion for Summary Judgment; denying defendants' 31 Motion for Summary Judgment. A conference is set for 10/25/10 at 9:00 a.m. in Courtroom 242 to discuss further processing of this case to final resolution and judgment. (cc: all counsel) (cms)
|
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 Wisconsin Eastern 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.
