Skip to content.
About GPO   |   Newsroom/Media   |   Congressional Relations   |   Inspector General   |   Careers   |   Contact   |   askGPO   |   Help  
 

  FDsys > More Information
(Search string is required)
 

12-629 - Luis v. Zang et al


Download Files

Metadata

Document in Context
12-629 - Luis v. Zang et al
July 5, 2012
PDF | More
ORDER: Plaintiff is directed to file the Controlling Complaint by July 20, 2012. Plaintiff's Motion for Leave to Consolidate Pending Motions in Previous Case 20 is GRANTED. Plaintiff's Motion for Extension of Time to Serve Process on All Un-Served Defendants in Lead Case 21 is GRANTED. Signed by Judge Virginia M. Hernandez Covington on 7/5/2012. (KAK) [Transferred from Florida Middle on 8/21/2012.]
August 20, 2012
PDF | More
ORDER: Defendant Zang General Contractors, Inc.'s Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Personal Jurisdiction and Improper Venue or, in the Alternative, for Transfer of Venue 43 and Defendants Joseph Zang's and Joseph Zang Custom Builders' Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Personal Jurisdiction and Improper Venue or, in the Alternative, for Transfer of Venue 44 are GRANTED to the extent that the Court transfers this case to the United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio. The Clerk is directed to effect transfer as outlined above and, thereafter, to close this case. See Order for details. Signed by Judge Virginia M. Hernandez Covington on 8/20/2012. (KAK) [Transferred from Florida Middle on 8/21/2012.]
November 15, 2012
PDF | More
ORDER granting 92 Motion to Consolidate Cases 1:11cv884 and 1:12cv629, with all future filings being docketed in 1:11cv884. Signed by Magistrate Judge Stephanie K. Bowman on 11/15/12. (jl1)
March 5, 2013
PDF | More
be dismissed. Objections to R&R due by 3/22/2013. Signed by Magistrate Judge Stephanie K. Bowman on 3/5/13. (mtw) Modified on 4/2/2014 (km1).REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS: IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT the 77 Motion of Defendant Awareness Technologies to dismiss all claims against it should be GRANTED. Plaintiff Luis's claims against that Defendant alone in Civil Case No. 1:12-cv-629 should
June 20, 2014
PDF | More
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS for 109 Report and Recommendations. The motion of Defendant Awareness technologies to dismiss all claims against it 77 is GRANTED. Plaintiff Luis's claims against that defendant alone in Civil Case No. 1:12cv629 is DISMISSED. Signed by Chief Judge Susan J. Dlott on 6/20/14. (sct1)
February 1, 2017
PDF | More
ferenced procedural error, and shall not be refiled without leave of this Court. Signed by Magistrate Judge Stephanie K. Bowman on 2/1/17. (sct)MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER: Plaintiff's motion for the appointment of counsel, for the appointment of an expert and for miscellaneous relief 182 is DENIED; Plaintiff's motion for extension of time in which to move to further amend his complaint against Awareness and/or to add new parties 185 is DENIED AS MOOT in light of Plaintiff's compliance with the 1/31/17 deadline; Plaintiff's second amended complaint 186 shall be STRICKEN based solely on the re
March 28, 2017
PDF | More
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS re 189 Plaintiff's Construed Motion to Further Amend Complaint. IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT Plaintiff's construed motion to further amend his complaint 189 should be GRANTED ONLY IN PART and otherwise should be DENIED. A separate Order has been filed this same day directing the Clerk of Court to file the newly amended complaint, subject to this R&R recommending dismissal of certain claims and parties. Objections to R&R due by 4/11/2017. Signed by Magistrate Judge Stephanie K. Bowman on 3/28/2017. (km)(This document has been sent by regular mail to the party(ies) listed in the NEF that did not receive electronic notification.)
September 8, 2017
PDF | More
ORDER adopting 196Report and Recommendations plaintiffs construed motion to further amend his complaint (Doc. 189) is GRANTED IN PART and otherwise DENIED. Plaintiffs motion to amend is GRANTED, but limited to the claims reflected in Counts I, II, V, and VII in Doc. 189-1 against the single Defendant Awareness Technologies, Inc.. Signed by Judge Susan J. Dlott on 9/8/2017. (jlw)(This document has been sent by regular mail to the party(ies) listed in the NEF that did not receive electronic notification.)
September 20, 2017
PDF | More
OPINION AND ORDER - IT IS ORDERED THAT: (1) Plaintiff's "motion to clarify" 203 is DENIED AS MOOT; (2) Plaintiff's "motion for leave to file/request to deny protective order" and his corrected versions of the same motion 207 208 209 are all DENIED in part and GRANTED IN PART as follows: (a) The motions are granted insofar as Paragraphs 4 and 5 of the Agreed Protective Order 204 are modified and reworded to state: 4. If Proprietary Information so designated by this Protective Order is to be filed with the Court in connection with any proceedings herein, the party seeking to file the information shall file a motion seeking leave to file the information under seal, and shall provide sufficient justification for that motion as required under controlling Sixth Circuit case law. The Clerk of Court will maintain the confidentiality of any documents and transcripts of testimony as to which the Court has authorized any party to file under seal 5. The designation of Proprietary Information by any party shall not constitute an admission or concession or permit an inference that the Proprietary Information is, in fact, proprietary and any party may object to the designation of any item as Proprietary by moving for entry of an Order that the Proprietary Information is not entitled to protection. Pending the Court's determination of said motion, the Proprietary Information shall be treated as Proprietary as provided in this Stipulation and Protective Order. The motion and all papers submitted to the Court in connection with the motion shall be designated as Proprietary and filed under seal only to the extent authorized by this Court in accord with Paragraph 4 above; (b) Plaintiff's motion (and corrected motions) seeking miscellaneous relief and the appointment of counsel are denied; (3) Given the number of years this case has been pending and the conclusion of fact discovery in May, the Court forewarns both parties that the November 30 deadline for the completion of all expert discovery and the 12/29/2017 dispositive motion deadline WILL NOT BE FURTHER EXTENDED absent an extraordinarily strong showing of good cause. Signed by Magistrate Judge Stephanie K. Bowman on 9/20/2017. (km) (This document has been sent by regular mail to the party(ies) listed in the NEF that did not receive electronic notification.)