United States Government Publishing Office
publisher
pbl
distributor
dst
United States
United States District Court Southern District of Ohio
author
aut
Government Organization
text
government publication
eng
USCOURTS
Judicial Publications
judicial
2017-07-11
Administrative Office of the United States Courts
2017-07-10
monographic
deposited
born digital
JU 4.15
https://www.govinfo.gov/app/details/USCOURTS-ohsd-3_16-cv-00323
P0b002ee19580680c
DGPO
2017-07-11
2017-07-11
USCOURTS-ohsd-3_16-cv-00323
machine generated
eng
fdlp
USCOURTS
USCOURTS-ohsd-3_16-cv-00323
District
ohsd
6th
Ohio
2393
3:16-cv-00323
Dayton
civil
445
Americans with Disabilities Act - Employment
28:1331 Fed. Question: Employment Discrimination
Back v. Teknol, Inc.
3:16-cv-00323
https://www.govinfo.gov/app/details/USCOURTS-ohsd-3_16-cv-00323
JU 4.15
3:16-cv-00323;16-323
United States District Court Southern District of Ohio
6th Circuit
Dayton
U.S. Courts
author
aut
Elizabeth Back
Back
Elizabeth
Plaintiff
Teknol, Inc.
Teknol, Inc.
Defendant
USCOURTS
USCOURTS-ohsd-3_16-cv-00323
District
ohsd
6th
Ohio
2393
3:16-cv-00323
Dayton
civil
445
Americans with Disabilities Act - Employment
28:1331 Fed. Question: Employment Discrimination
Ohio
Back v. Teknol, Inc.
STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER. Signed by Magistrate Judge Michael J. Newman on 4/21/2017. (dm)
0
2017-04-21
D09002ee1958215f4
https://www.govinfo.gov/app/details/USCOURTS-ohsd-3_16-cv-00323/USCOURTS-ohsd-3_16-cv-00323-0
ohsd-3_16-cv-00323_0.pdf
https://www.govinfo.gov/app/details/USCOURTS-ohsd-3_16-cv-00323/USCOURTS-ohsd-3_16-cv-00323-0
https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/USCOURTS-ohsd-3_16-cv-00323/pdf/USCOURTS-ohsd-3_16-cv-00323-0.pdf
USCOURTS 3:16-cv-00323; Back v. Teknol, Inc.;
United States District Court Southern District of Ohio
Ohio
USCOURTS-ohsd-3_16-cv-00323-0
0
2017-04-21
STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER. Signed by Magistrate Judge Michael J. Newman on 4/21/2017. (dm)
Back v. Teknol, Inc.
ORDER DISMISSING CASE-The Court having been advised by counsel for the parties that the above matter has been settled, IT IS ORDERED that this action is hereby DISMISSED, with prejudice as to the parties, provided that any of the parties may, upon good cause shown within 30 days, reopen the action if settlement is not consummated. The Court will retain jurisdiction to enforce the terms of the settlement between the parties, if necessary. Signed by Judge Thomas M. Rose on 7-10-2017. (de)
1
2017-07-10
D09002ee1958215f5
https://www.govinfo.gov/app/details/USCOURTS-ohsd-3_16-cv-00323/USCOURTS-ohsd-3_16-cv-00323-1
ohsd-3_16-cv-00323_1.pdf
https://www.govinfo.gov/app/details/USCOURTS-ohsd-3_16-cv-00323/USCOURTS-ohsd-3_16-cv-00323-1
https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/USCOURTS-ohsd-3_16-cv-00323/pdf/USCOURTS-ohsd-3_16-cv-00323-1.pdf
USCOURTS 3:16-cv-00323; Back v. Teknol, Inc.;
United States District Court Southern District of Ohio
Ohio
USCOURTS-ohsd-3_16-cv-00323-1
1
2017-07-10
ORDER DISMISSING CASE-The Court having been advised by counsel for the parties that the above matter has been settled, IT IS ORDERED that this action is hereby DISMISSED, with prejudice as to the parties, provided that any of the parties may, upon good cause shown within 30 days, reopen the action if settlement is not consummated. The Court will retain jurisdiction to enforce the terms of the settlement between the parties, if necessary. Signed by Judge Thomas M. Rose on 7-10-2017. (de)