Espencheid v. DirectSat USA, LLC et al
Plaintiff: Aaron L. Espencheid
Defendant: DirectSat USA, LLC, DirectSat USA and UniTek USA
Case Number: 3:2009cv00625
Filed: October 13, 2009
Court: US District Court for the Western District of Wisconsin
Office: Madison Office
County: Dane
Presiding Judge:
Presiding Judge: Barbara B. Crabb
Presiding Judge: Stephen L. Crocker
Nature of Suit: None
Cause of Action: 29 U.S.C. ยง 201 Denial of Overtime Compensation
Jury Demanded By: None

Available Case Documents

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

Date Filed Document Text
March 20, 2012 Opinion or Order Filing 746 JUDGMENT entered in favor of Defendants DirectSat USA, LLC and UniTek USA, LLC decertifying case as a class and collective action and dismissing claims of all opt-in plaintiffs and unnamed class members without prejudice. (BBC / PAO). Signed by Peter A. Oppeneer, Clerk of Court on 3/20/12. (krj)
September 14, 2011 Opinion or Order Filing 671 USCA ORDER denying petition of plaintiffs for permission to appeal from the district court's decertification order. (krj)
May 27, 2011 Opinion or Order Filing 660 ORDER amending 5/23/11 court order 643 to certify the court's decision decertifying nationwide FLSA collective action for interlocutory review; case stayed until Court of Appeals decides whether to permit plaintiffs' interlocutory appeals; trial rescheduled for 9/6/11. Signed by District Judge Barbara B. Crabb on 5/27/11. (krj)
May 23, 2011 Opinion or Order Filing 643 ORDER decertifying case as a class and collective action. Claims of all opt-in plaintiffs and unnamed class members are dismissed without prejudice. Plaintiffs are to notify court whether they intend to proceed to trial with claims of named plainti ffs before 4:00 p.m. on 5/26/11. Defendants are to notify court whether they object to the 6/6/11 trial date on plaintiffs' individual claims before 4:00 p.m. on 5/26/11. Parties are to inform court which of their motions in limine they consider relevant to plaintiffs' individual claims by midnight on 5/24/11. Signed by District Judge Barbara B. Crabb on 5/23/11. (krj)
March 29, 2011 Opinion or Order Filing 466 ORDER from USCA denying defendants' petition for permission to appeal from order granting class certification pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 34(f). (krj)
March 28, 2011 Opinion or Order Filing 465 ORDER on motion hearing held on 3/25/11. Signed by District Judge Barbara B. Crabb on 3/28/11. (krj)
November 3, 2010 Opinion or Order Filing 276 ORDER granting in part and denying in part 267 Motion to Strike or in the alternative, for an extension of time. Defendants may depose up to 10 of the individuals who submitted declarations. Response to motion to certify state classes due 11/18/10; reply due 11/25/10. Signed by District Judge Barbara B. Crabb on 11/3/10. (krj)
June 30, 2010 Opinion or Order Filing 140 ORDER granting 123 Motion to Dismiss without prejudice the Counterclaims of defendants DirectSat USA, LLC and UniTek re: unjust enrichment, misrepresentation and detrimental reliance. Plaintiffs are authorized to distribute the notice and consent form as set forth in the 6/4/2010 order. Signed by District Judge Barbara B. Crabb on 6/30/2010. (vob) Modified text on 7/1/2010 (llj). Modified on 7/1/2010 (llj).
June 7, 2010 Opinion or Order Filing 129 ORDER granting in part and staying in part 65 Motion for Conditional Certification of Class. Signed by District Judge Barbara B. Crabb on 6/4/10. (krj)
May 10, 2010 Opinion or Order Filing 118 ORDER granting 111 motion for costs pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(d). Defendants awarded $1,195.30 in costs. Signed by District Judge Barbara B. Crabb on 5/10/10. (krj)
April 13, 2010 Opinion or Order Filing 110 ORDER denying 45 Motion to Dismiss or Transfer by defendants; granting 49 Motion for costs and fees by defendants. Briefing set: support 4/19/2010; response 4/26/2010. Signed by District Judge Barbara B. Crabb on 4/12/2010. (llj)
January 7, 2010 Opinion or Order Filing 29 Order setting briefing on 16 motion to transfer and/or dismiss. Plaintiff's response due 1/12/10; defendants' reply due 1/19/10. Signed by Magistrate Judge Stephen L. Crocker on 1/7/10. (krj)
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 Wisconsin Western District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Espencheid v. DirectSat USA, LLC et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Aaron L. Espencheid
Represented By: Michael J. Modl
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: DirectSat USA, LLC
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: DirectSat USA
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: UniTek USA
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?