Rouse v. CVS Pharmacy Incorporated
| Kevin Rouse |
| CVS Pharmacy Incorporated |
| 2:2019cv01978 |
| March 26, 2019 |
| US District Court for the District of Arizona |
| Dominic W Lanza |
| Other Statutes: Consumer Credit |
| 47 U.S.C. ยง 227 |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on May 8, 2019. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| ACKNOWLEDGMENT of Receipt of Electronic Transfer in the District of Minnesota. New Case Number: 0:19-cv-1224. This is a TEXT ENTRY ONLY. There is no PDF document associated with this entry. (MAP) |
Filing 13
ORDER: IT IS ORDERED that the parties' Joint Stipulation to Transfer Venue to the United States District Court for the District of Minnesota and Extend Answer Deadline (Doc. #12 ) is granted. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this entire action be transferred to District of Minnesota, Third and Fourth Division. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendant's deadline to respond to Plaintiff's Complaint shall be twenty-one (21) days from the date that the District of Minnesota accepts transfer. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendant's pending motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction or alternative motion to transfer venue to the District of Minnesota (Doc. #9 ) is denied as moot. Signed by Judge Dominic W Lanza on 5/6/2019. (SST)
|
| Remark: Case transferred to the District of Minnesota, Third and Fourth Division by electronic transfer. This is a TEXT ENTRY ONLY. There is no PDF document associated with this entry. (SST) |
| Filing 12 STIPULATION Transfer Venue and Extend Answer Deadline by CVS Pharmacy Incorporated. (Attachments: #1 Text of Proposed Order Proposed Order)(Allin, Taylor) |
| Filing 11 NOTICE TO FILER OF DEFICIENCY re: #9 MOTION to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction. Document not in compliance with LRCiv 7.1(a)(3) - Party names must be capitalized using proper upper and lower case type. Document not in compliance with LRCiv 7.1(b)(1) Pleadings and Other Paper. Please note for future filings; All pleadings must be signed as provided in FedRuleCiv 11(a). No further action is required. This is a TEXT ENTRY ONLY. There is no PDF document associated with this entry. (DXD) |
| Filing 10 Corporate Disclosure Statement by CVS Pharmacy Incorporated identifying Corporate Parent CVS Health Corporation for CVS Pharmacy Incorporated. (Allin, Taylor) *Modified record on 4/22/2019 (DXD). |
| Filing 9 MOTION to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction by CVS Pharmacy Incorporated. (Attachments: #1 Supplement Part 2 of Motion to Dismiss, #2 Affidavit Declaration of Thomas Moffatt)(Allin, Taylor) |
| Filing 8 NOTICE of Attorney Withdrawal Thomas J. Lyons Sr. by Kevin Rouse. (Lyons, Thomas) *Modified to correct event on 4/22/2019 (DXD). |
| Remark: Pro hac vice motion granted for Thomas J Lyons Jr. on behalf of plaintiff. This is a TEXT ENTRY ONLY. There is no PDF document associated with this entry. (BAS) |
| Filing 7 SERVICE EXECUTED filed by Kevin Rouse: Certificate of Service re: Summons, Complaint, MIDP Notice, MIDP Users' Manual Preliminary Order upon CVS Pharmacy, Inc. on 3/29/2019. (Mengedoth, Paul) |
|
Filing 6
PRELIMINARY ORDER: IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED: 1. That Plaintiff(s) must promptly serve a copy of this Order and its Attachments on Defendant(s) and file notice of service with the Clerk of Court; 2. That, unless the Court orders otherwise, on June 25, 2019, the Clerk of Court shall terminate without further notice any Defendant in this action that has not been served pursuant to Rule 4(m) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure; 3. That, unless the Court orders otherwise, the parties shall file with the Clerk of Court a notice of service of MIDP Responses, supplemental MIDP Responses, and production of ESI, rather than copies of the actual disclosures [see attached Order for details]. Signed by Judge Dominic W Lanza on 3/26/19. (Attachments: #1 Notice - MIDP, #2 MIDP User Manual)(MAW)
|
| Filing 5 Summons Issued as to CVS Pharmacy Incorporated. (MCO). *** 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. (MCO) |
| Filing 3 Filing fee paid, receipt number 0970-16699599. This case has been assigned to the Honorable Dominic W Lanza. All future pleadings or documents should bear the correct case number: CV-19-1978-PHX-DWL. Notice of Availability of Magistrate Judge to Exercise Jurisdiction form attached. (MCO) |
| Filing 2 SUMMONS Submitted by Kevin Rouse. (Mengedoth, Paul) (MCO) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT. Filing fee received: $ 400.00, receipt number 0970-16699599 filed by Kevin Rouse. (Mengedoth, Paul) (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet)(MCO) |
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.
