Visteon Corporation v. Leuliette
ORDER DENYING 15 Visteon's Motion for Preliminary Injunction; DENYING without Prejudice 16 Visteon's Motion to Determine Which Filings Should be Filed Under Seal; DENYING without Prejudice 23 Leuliette's Motion to Dismiss, and STAYING the Case. Signed by District Judge Terrence G. Berg. (AChu)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
CASE NO. 16-11180
HON. TERRENCE G. BERG
ORDER DENYING VISTEON’S MOTION FOR A PRELIMINARY
INJUNCTION (DKT. 15), DENYING WITHOUT PREJUDICE VISTEON’S
MOTION TO DETERMINE WHICH FILINGS SHOULD BE FILED UNDER
SEAL (DKT. 16), DENYING WITHOUT PREJUDICE LEULIETTE’S
MOTION TO DISMISS (DKT. 23) AND STAYING THIS CASE
This is an employment dispute between Visteon and its former President and
CEO Timothy Leuliette. This matter came before the Court on August 3, 2016,
when the Court heard argument on several motions. As discussed in greater detail
on the record during the hearing, Leuliette initiated arbitration proceedings against
Visteon on February 19, 2016 – before Visteon filed this lawsuit on March 31, 2016.
Having considered the briefs filed by the parties, and the oral argument presented,
the Court will STAY this case pending the conclusion of the arbitration
For the reasons stated on the record during the hearing on August 3, 2016,
Visteon’s motion for a preliminary injunction (Dkt. 15) is DENIED; the Court will
not stay the ongoing arbitration proceedings. Visteon’s motion to determine which
filings should be filed under seal (Dkt. 16) is DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.
This question may be readdressed when the stay in this case is lifted at the
conclusion of the arbitration proceedings. Finally, Leuliette’s motion to dismiss
(Dkt. 23) is DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. The viability of the claims
presented in Visteon’s first amended complaint (Dkt. 14) shall be determined after
the stay in this case is lifted at the conclusion of the arbitration proceedings.
Either party may move to lift the stay of this case at the conclusion of the
arbitration, either to confirm any arbitration award that the arbitrator may issue
and reduce it to a judgment, or to litigate any remaining disputes that the
arbitrator determines that he or she does not have the jurisdiction to determine.
This order is not a final judgment, and does not close this case.
Finally, the Court will conduct a telephonic status conference in this matter
on FEBRUARY 15, 2017 at 10:00 a.m. During this call, the parties shall update
the Court on the status of the arbitration proceedings. COUNSEL FOR
PLAINTIFF shall initiate the call and include the Court when all parties are
present by calling (810) 341−9760.
s/Terrence G. Berg
TERRENCE G. BERG
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Dated: August 5, 2016
Certificate of Service
I hereby certify that this Order was electronically submitted on August 5,
2016, using the CM/ECF system, which will send notification to each party.
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?