Legal Opinion

ARUP Laboratories v. Pacific Medical Laboratory

District Court, D. Utah

Decided January 31, 2022No. 2:20-cv-00186Unknown

1Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF UTAH CENTRAL DIVISION ARUP LABORATORIES, INC., MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER DENYING MOTION TO Plaintiff, AMEND SCHEDULING ORDER TO REOPEN FACT DISCOVERY v. (DOC. NO. 64) PACIFIC MEDICAL LABORATORY, Case No. 2:20-cv-00186 INC., Judge David Barlow Defendant. Magistrate Judge Daphne A. Oberg Before the court is Defendant Pacific Medical Laboratory, Inc.’s (“PML”) Motion to Amend Scheduling Order to Reopen Fact Discovery, (“Mot.,” Doc. No. 64). Plaintiff ARUP Laboratories, Inc. (“ARUP”) opposes the motion. (Opp’n, Doc. No. 68.) For the reasons…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Pioneer Investment Services Co. v. Brunswick Associates Ltd. PartnershipSupreme Court of the United States · 1993
  2. Abdulhaseeb v. CalboneCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2010
  3. Smith v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1987
  4. Utah Republican Party v. HerbertCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2017

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API