Brackens et al v. First American Home Warranty Corporation
| Roquel Davidson and Kendra Brackens |
| First American Home Warranty Corporation |
| 2:2018cv04234 |
| November 28, 2018 |
| US District Court for the District of Arizona |
| Susan R Bolton |
| Labor: Fair Standards |
| 29 U.S.C. ยง 201 |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on January 11, 2019. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 8
ORDER granting a one-time extension of time until February 25, 2019 to respond to complaint. The parties' obligations to produce the information called for in the MIDP will be triggered by Defendant's answer to the complaint after the extension. No further extensions will be granted. Signed by Senior Judge Susan R Bolton on 1/11/19. (MAW)
|
| Filing 7 STIPULATION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO ANSWER COMPLAINT Notice of Appearance and Stipulated Request to Extend First American's Time to Answer or Otherwise Respond to Plaintiffs' Complaint by First American Home Warranty Corporation. (Attachments: #1 Text of Proposed Order Order)(Brockelman, Kent) |
| Remark: Pro hac vice motions granted for James X Bormes and Catherine P Sons on behalf of plaintiffs. This is a TEXT ENTRY ONLY. There is no PDF document associated with this entry. (BAS) |
| Remark: Pro hac vice motion granted for Thomas M Ryan on behalf of plaintiffs. This is a TEXT ENTRY ONLY. There is no PDF document associated with this entry. (BAS) |
|
Filing 6
ORDER that motions pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b) are discouraged if the defect can be cured by filing an amended pleading. The parties must meet and confer prior to the filing of such motions to determine whether it can be avoided. FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff(s) serve a copy of this Order upon Defendant(s) and file a notice of service. See attached Order for complete details. Signed by Senior Judge Susan R Bolton on 11/28/18. (MAW)
|
| Filing 5 Summons Issued as to First American Home Warranty Corporation. (MFR). *** IMPORTANT: When printing the summons, select "Document and stamps" or "Document and comments" for the seal to appear on the document. |
| Filing 4 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. (MFR) |
| Filing 3 Filing fee paid, receipt number 0970-16242226. This case has been assigned to the Honorable Susan R Bolton. All future pleadings or documents should bear the correct case number: CV-18-4234-PHX-SRB. Notice of Availability of Magistrate Judge to Exercise Jurisdiction form attached. (MFR) |
| Filing 2 SUMMONS Submitted by Kendra Brackens, Roquel Davidson. (Matheson, Michelle) (MFR) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT. Filing fee received: $ 400.00, receipt number 0970-16242226 filed by Kendra Brackens, Roquel Davidson. (Matheson, Michelle) (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet)(MFR) |
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.
