Finestone v. Utility Telecom Group, LLC et al
| Jonathan Finestone |
| Utility Telephone, Inc., Jason Mills and Utility Telecom Group, LLC |
| 2:2020cv00230 |
| January 30, 2020 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of California |
| Kendall J Newman |
| Troy L Nunley |
| Other Statutory Actions |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1331 |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on July 18, 2023. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 5 SUMMONS RETURNED EXECUTED: All Defendants. (Taff-Rice, Anita) |
| Filing 4 STIPULATION to EXTEND TIME to 4/7/2020, to Respond to #1 Complaint by Jason Mills, Utility Telecom Group, LLC, Utility Telephone, Inc. Attorney Filippini, Sean J. added. (Filippini, Sean) Modified on 3/5/2020 (York, M). |
| Filing 3 CIVIL NEW CASE DOCUMENTS ISSUED; (Attachments: #1 Consent Form, #2 VDRP) (Benson, A.) |
| Filing 2 SUMMONS ISSUED as to *Jason Mills, Utility Telecom Group, LLC, Utility Telephone, Inc.* with answer to complaint due within *21* days. Attorney *Anita Taff-Rice* *iCommLaw* *1547 Palos Verdes, #298* *Walnut Creek, CA 94597*. (Benson, A.) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT against All Defendants by Jonathan Finestone. Attorney Taff-Rice, Anita added. (Filing fee $ 400, receipt number 0972-8702261) (Attachments: #1 Exhibit, #2 Exhibit, #3 Exhibit, #4 Exhibit, #5 Exhibit, #6 Exhibit, #7 Civil Cover Sheet)(Taff-Rice, Anita) |
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 California Eastern 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.
