Woods

Woods v. Protection One Alarm Monitoring, Inc.

Good Law
628 F. Supp. 2d 1173·2007 WL 2391075·2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 61664
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaAugust 22, 20072:06-cr-00398California12,768 words

Opinion

Opinion

Snyder, J.

ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT (DOCS. 38 AND 52)

ORDER RE: PROTECTION ONE ALARM MONITORING’S OBJECTIONS TO EVIDENCE AND REQUEST TO STRIKE EVIDENCE IN OPPOSITION TO MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT (DOC. 62-2)

ORDER RE: PROTECTION ONE ALARM MONITORING’S REQUEST & AMENDED REQUEST FOR JUDICIAL NOTICE (DOCS. 52-7, 62-3)

Plaintiffs are proceeding with a civil action in this Court. By order dated August 30, 2006, entered upon the parties’ consent, Judge Oliver W. Wanger assigned this action to the undersigned Magistrate Judge for all proceedings, including the entry of final judgment, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636 (c), Fed.R.Civ.P. 73(b), and Local Rule 73-301.

I. Introduction

Pending before the Court for determination are two motions for summary judgment filed by Defendants Protection One Alarm Monitoring, Inc. (POAM) and Asset Resources, Inc. (AR), respectively, along POAM’s objections to evidence and request to strike evidence filed in opposition to its motion for summary judgment, and POAM’s request and amended request for judicial notice.

Defendant AR filed its motion for summary judgment and memorandum of points and authorities on March 2, 2007. On April…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.