Martin v. Insys Therapeutics Incorporated
| Ramon Martin |
| Insys Therapeutics Incorporated |
| 2:2018cv03338 |
| October 17, 2018 |
| US District Court for the District of Arizona |
| Douglas L Rayes |
| Personal Injury: Health Care/Pharmaceutical Personal Injury Product Liability |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1441 |
| Defendant |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on October 22, 2018. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 8 MINUTE ORDER: Pursuant to #7 Notice of Voluntary Dismissal, Civil Case Terminated. This is a TEXT ENTRY ONLY. There is no PDF document associated with this entry. (MMO) |
| Filing 7 NOTICE of Voluntary Dismissal by Ramon Martin. (O'Hara, Sean) |
| Filing 6 Additional Attachments to Main Document re: #1 Notice of Removal /Supplemental Civil Cover Sheet by Defendant Insys Therapeutics Incorporated. (Myers, Michael) |
| Filing 5 NOTICE TO FILER OF DEFICIENCY re: #1 Notice of Removal filed by Insys Therapeutics Incorporated. Document not in compliance with LRCiv 7.1(a)(3) - Party names must be capitalized using proper upper and lower case type. No further action is required. This is a TEXT ENTRY ONLY. There is no PDF document associated with this entry. (BAC) |
| Filing 4 NOTICE TO FILER OF DEFICIENCY re: #1 Notice of Removal filed by Insys Therapeutics Incorporated. Pursuant to the Electronic Case Filing Administrative Policies and Procedures Manual Section II(B), attorneys are required to submit the Supplemental Civil Cover Sheet when filing a new Removal case. FOLLOW-UP ACTION REQUIRED: Please. Deficiency must be corrected within one business day of this notice. This is a TEXT ENTRY ONLY. There is no PDF document associated with this entry. (BAC) |
| Filing 3 NOTICE TO THE PARTIES - The Court is participating in the Mandatory Initial Discovery Pilot (MIDP) and this case is subject to that pilot. The key features and deadlines are set forth in the attached Notice which includes General Order 17-08. Also attached is a checklist for use by the parties. All parties must respond to the mandatory initial discovery requests set forth in the General Order before initiating any further discovery in this case. Please note: The discovery obligations in the General Order supersede the disclosures required by Rule 26(a)(1). Any party seeking affirmative relief must serve a copy of the attached documents (Notice to Parties, including General Order 17-08 and MIDP Checklist) on each new party when the Complaint, Counterclaim, Crossclaim, or Third-Party Complaint is served. (BAC) |
| Filing 2 Filing fee paid, receipt number 0970-16087959. This case has been assigned to the Honorable Douglas L Rayes. All future pleadings or documents should bear the correct case number: CV-18-03338-PHX-DLR. Notice of Availability of Magistrate Judge to Exercise Jurisdiction form attached.(BAC) |
| Filing 1 NOTICE OF REMOVAL from Maricopa County Superior Court, case number CV2018-011335. Filing fee received: $400.00, receipt number 0970-16087959 filed by Insys Therapeutics Incorporated. (Myers, Michael) (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A, #2 Civil Cover Sheet)(BAC) |
| ***STATE COURT RECORDS RECEIVED***SERVICE EXECUTED: Certificate of Service re: Summons, Complaint, Certificate of Compulsory Arbitration, Civil Cover Sheet upon Insys Therapeutics, Inc, C/O CT Corporation System, Statutory Agent on 9/18/18, and 9/19/18 (original filed in Maricopa county Superior Court on 9/20/18, and 9/24/18).(BAC) This is a TEXT ENTRY ONLY. There is no PDF document associated with this entry. |
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 Arizona 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.
