NOR 42038
Docket Yard · docketyard.org/d/NOR-42038 · entries shown: all, newest first
MINNESOTA POWER, INC. V. DULUTH, MISSABE AND IRON RANGE RAILWAY COMPANY
Caption from the Board’s record.
0 filings, 9 decisions and 0 environmental comments observed here; last checked 11 Oct 2026, 03:36 UTC; last new entry 26 Aug 2026, 15:18 UTC.
Entries
-
served (printed as 1/5/2001)Decision30991SecretaryDISMISSED AND DISCONTINUED THE COMPLAINT FILED BY MINESOTA POWER, INC. IN THIS PROCEEDING.
-
served (printed as 7/26/2000)Decision31197CommissionerPOSTPONED THE DATE FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE MARCH 6 DECISION UNTIL SEPTEMBER 29, 2000.
-
served (printed as 4/18/2000)Decision30948CommissionerPOSTPONED THE DATE FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE ACCOUNTING PROVISIONS OF THE MARCH 6 DECISION UNTIL JULY 14, 2000.
-
served (printed as 3/6/2000)Decision30710Entire Board(1) FOUND THAT THE BOARD CANNOT DETERMINE THE REVENUE-TO-VARIABLE COST (R/VC) LEVEL ON THE PRESENT RECORD, (2) DIRECTED THE DEFENDANT, DMIR TO DEVELOP AND FILE THE INFORMATION THAT IS NEEDED TO ENABLE A RELIABLE R/VC DETERMINATION, AND (3) HELD THE CASE IN ABEYANCE IN THE MEANTIME.
-
served (printed as 7/8/1999)Decision30311Entire BoardDENIED (1) MPI'S MOTION FOR AN ORDER COMPELLING DMIR TO COMPLY WITH MAY 11, 1999 DECISION, AND (2) DMIR'S PETITION TO REOPEN AND RECONSIDER MAY 11, 1999 DECISION.
-
served (printed as 6/9/1999)Decision30286SecretaryDIRECTED PARTIES THAT ON OR BEFORE JUNE 10, 1999, THEY MUST COMPLY WITH THE MOTIONS TO COMPEL TO THE EXTENT PROVIDED IN THE BOARD'S DECISION SERVED MAY 11, 1999.
-
served (printed as 5/11/1999)Decision30148Entire BoardRESOLVED ALL REMAINING DISCOVERY DISPUTES AND ESTABLISHED A PROCEDURAL SCHEDULE FOR PRESENTATION OF EVIDENCE ON THE MERITS.
-
served (printed as 3/10/1999)Decision30066SecretaryGRANTED MINNESOTA POWER, INC.'S MOTION TO COMPEL AS SET FORTH IN THE DECISION AND SUSPENDED THE DISCOVERY SCHEDULE UNTIL FURTHER NOTICE.
-
served (printed as 1/19/1999)Decision29959SecretaryGRANTED THE JOINT MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER AND DIRECTED THE PARTIES TO COMPLY WITH THE PROTECTIVE ORDER IN THE APPENDIX TO THIS DECISION.
Nothing of that kind in this docket.