McIntosh v. United States Steel Corporation et al
| Mark McIntosh |
| United States Steel Corporation and Lexicon Inc |
| 2:2022cv01147 |
| September 7, 2022 |
| US District Court for the Northern District of Alabama |
| Staci G Cornelius |
| R David Proctor |
| P.I.: Other |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1441 Petition for Removal- Personal Injury |
| Both |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on November 2, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 13 NOTICE OF REASSIGNMENT-Because the parties have not unanimously consented to the dispositive jurisdiction by a Magistrate Judge, the above styled civil action has been randomly reassigned to the Honorable R. David Proctor. Please use case number 2:22 CV 1147 RDP on all subsequent pleadings. Magistrate Judge Staci G Cornelius no longer assigned to the case. (AKD) |
| Filing 12 NOTICE by United States Steel Corporation of Service of Initial Disclosures (Brown, Henry) |
| Filing 11 NOTICE to remind parties that the deadline to submit forms indicating whether they consent to magistrate judge jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 636 is October 31, 2022. In the absence of consent by all parties, the case will be reassigned after October 31, 2022. (BST, ) |
| Filing 10 REPORT of Rule 26(f) Planning Meeting. (Lawrence, John) |
| Filing 9 Corporate Disclosure Statement by Lexicon Inc, United States Steel Corporation. filed by Lexicon Inc, United States Steel Corporation (Ross, Brett) |
| Filing 8 Corporate Disclosure Statement by Mark McIntosh. filed by Mark McIntosh (Lawrence, John) |
Filing 7
ORDER-Pursuant to the General Order for Referral of Civil Matters to the United States Magistrate Judges of the Northern District of Alabama, dated January 2, 2015, the parties are REQUIRED to enter an election regarding the exercise of dispositive jurisdiction by a magistrate judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 636(c) no later than October 31, 2022. In the absence of consent by all parties, the Clerk is DIRECTED to reassign the case to a randomly drawn district judge without further order after October 31, 2022. Signed by Magistrate Judge Staci G Cornelius on 09/15/2022. (AKD)
|
|
Filing 6
ORDER regarding compliance with Rule 26; Rule 26 Meeting Report due by 10/20/2022; Signed by Magistrate Judge Staci G Cornelius on 9/15/2022. (BST, )
|
| Filing 5 ANSWER to Complaint with Jury Demand by United States Steel Corporation.(Brown, Henry) |
| Filing 4 Defendant Lexicon's ANSWER to Complaint by Lexicon Inc.(Ross, Brett) |
| Filing 3 Corporate Disclosure Statement by United States Steel Corporation. filed by United States Steel Corporation (Brown, Henry) |
| Filing 2 NOTICE OF CONSENT to a magistrate judge in a civil action. (AKD) |
| Complaint deemed filed in Circuit Court of Jefferson County, AL on 7/29/2022 (AKD) |
| Filing Fee: Filing fee $ 402, receipt_number AALNDC-4165155 (ALND receipt# B-1019). related document #1 NOTICE OF REMOVAL by United States Steel Corporation from Circuit Court of Jefferson County, AL, case number 68-CV-2022-900424.00., filed by United States Steel Corporation. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A, # 2 Exhibit B, # 3 Exhibit C)(AKD). (Brown, Henry) Modified on 9/8/2022 (AKD). |
| Filing 1 NOTICE OF REMOVAL by United States Steel Corporation from Circuit Court of Jefferson County, AL, case number 68-CV-2022-900424.00., filed by United States Steel Corporation. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A, #2 Exhibit B, #3 Exhibit C)(AKD) |
Access additional case information on PACER
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the Alabama Northern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
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.
