Mott et al v. Inspire Medical Systems Incorporated et al
| Edward T Mott and Kacey Mott |
| Inspire Medical Systems Incorporated and Unknown Parties |
| 2:2022cv01533 |
| September 12, 2022 |
| US District Court for the District of Arizona |
| Diane J Humetewa |
| Personal Injury: Prod. Liability |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1441 Petition for Removal |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on October 7, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 7
ORDER: Before the Court is a Notice of Settlement (Doc. #6 ) Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that the parties shall file a Stipulation to Dismiss by December 7, 2022. If no Stipulation to Dismiss is filed by that date, the parties shall file a Joint Status Report with the Court. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the November 2, 2022, Rule 16 Scheduling Conference (Doc. #4 ) is vacated. Ordered by Judge Diane J. Humetewa on 10/7/2022. This is a TEXT ENTRY ONLY. There is no PDF document associated with this entry. (ESG)
|
| Filing 6 *Joint MOTION to Vacate All Deadlines and Joint Notice of Settlement in Principle by Inspire Medical Systems Incorporated. (Attachments: #1 Proposed Order Proposed Order Vacating Deadlines)(Bettini, Kathryn) *Modified to reflect Local Rule violation; attorney noticed on 10/7/2022 (SST). |
| Remark: Pro hac vice motion(s) granted for Patrick H Reilly on behalf of Defendant Inspire Medical Systems Incorporated. This is a TEXT ENTRY ONLY. There is no PDF document associated with this entry. (BAS) |
|
Filing 5
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. ORDERED that Plaintiff(s) serve a copy of this Order upon Defendant(s) and file a notice of service. See Order for details. Signed by Judge Diane J Humetewa on 9/13/2022. (LFIG)
|
|
Filing 4
ORDER setting a Rule 16 Scheduling Conference for 11/2/2022 at 10:00 AM in Courtroom 605, 401 West Washington Street, Phoenix, AZ 85003 before Judge Diane J Humetewa. Signed by Judge Diane J Humetewa on 9/13/2022. (See Order for details.) (LFIG)
|
| Remark: Pro hac vice motion(s) granted for Tess Godhardt on behalf of Defendant Inspire Medical Systems Incorporated. This is a TEXT ENTRY ONLY. There is no PDF document associated with this entry. (BAS) |
| Filing 3 Filing fee paid, receipt number AAZDC-21089788. This case has been assigned to the Honorable Diane J. Humetewa. All future pleadings or documents should bear the correct case number: CV-22-01533-PHX-DJH. Notice of Availability of Magistrate Judge to Exercise Jurisdiction form attached. (SCA) |
| Filing 2 Corporate Disclosure Statement by Inspire Medical Systems Incorporated. (Bettini, Kathryn) (SCA) |
| Filing 1 NOTICE OF REMOVAL from Maricopa County Superior Court, case number CV2022-051747. Filing fee received: $ 402.00, receipt number AAZDC-21089788 filed by Inspire Medical Systems Incorporated. (Bettini, Kathryn) (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet, #2 Supplemental Civil Cover Sheet, #3 Exhibit)(SCA) |
| ***STATE COURT RECORDS RECEIVED*** SERVICE EXECUTED : Rule 4 Waiver of Service of Summons. Waiver sent on 08/23/2022 to Bryan K Phillips Attorney for Inspire Medical Systems Incorporated. (Original filed in Maricopa County Superior Court on 06/01/2022) (SCA) 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.
