Klug v. Watts Regulator Company, et al
Filing
116
ORDER granting (112) SEALED MOTION in case 8:15-cv-00061-JFB-FG3; granting (111) SEALED MOTION in case 8:16-cv-00200-JFB-FG3. Ordered by Senior Judge Joseph F. Bataillon. (ADB) Modified on 6/30/2016 to unseal(ADB, )
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEBRASKA
CURTIS KLUG, individually and on behalf
of all others similarly situated; LAWRENCE
NOVER, AND NELS ROE,
8:15CV61
Plaintiffs,
ORDER
vs.
WATTS REGULATOR COMPANY,
Defendant.
DURWIN SHARP, on behalf of himself and
all others similarly situated; JOSEPH
PONZO, on behalf of himself and all others
similarly situated; KATHRYN MEYERS,
AND on behalf of herself and all others
similarly situated; and JOSHUA WHIPP, on
behalf of himself and all others similarly
situated;
8:16CV200
ORDER
Plaintiffs,
vs.
WATTS REGULATOR CO.,
Defendant.
This matter is before the Court on the defendant’s motion to strike confidential
declaration of Thomas J. Hackney, Filing No. 112 in 8:15cv61 and Filing No. 111 in
8:16cv200. No response or objection has been filed. The Court reviewed the motion
and argument of the defendants. The specified paragraphs objected to by the
defendants, paragraphs 4 and 5, regard certain settlement agreements. Defendants
object on the grounds of relevance and lack of foundation. After reviewing the
paragraphs, the Court finds the argument stated by the defendants is persuasive. The
Court sees no relevance in the settlement of these various cases. Therefore, the Court
will grant the motion and strike paragraphs 4 and 5.
THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED that:
1.
Watts Regulator Company’s motion to strike, Filing No. 112 in 8:15cv61
and Filing No. 111 in 8:16cv200, is granted.
2.
Paragraphs 4 and 5 of the Thomas J. Hackney declaration, Filing No. 108
in 8:15cv61 and Filing No. 106 in 8:16cv200, are stricken.
Dated this 30th day of June, 2016
BY THE COURT:
s/ Joseph F. Bataillon
Senior United States District Judge
2
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?