U.S. Specialty Insurance Company v. Branstetter Construction, Inc.
Plaintiff: U.S. Specialty Insurance Company
Defendant: Branstetter Construction, Inc.
Case Number: 3:2019cv02378
Filed: May 1, 2019
Court: US District Court for the Northern District of California
Presiding Judge: James Donato
Referring Judge: Donna M Ryu
Nature of Suit: Insurance
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 1332
Jury Demanded By: None
RSS RSS Track this Docket
Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on April 2, 2021. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
July 3, 2019 Filing 13 NOTICE by U.S. Specialty Insurance Company of Request for Continuance of Case Management Conference (and Proposed Order thereon) (Elowsky, Jennifer) (Filed on 7/3/2019)
June 21, 2019 Filing 12 STIPULATION re #1 Complaint, Joint Stipulation to Extend Time to Answer Complaint (L.R. 6-1(a)) filed by U.S. Specialty Insurance Company. (Elowsky, Jennifer) (Filed on 6/21/2019)
June 3, 2019 Filing 11 SUMMONS Returned Executed by U.S. Specialty Insurance Company. Branstetter Construction, Inc. served on 5/24/2019, answer due 6/14/2019. (Elowsky, Jennifer) (Filed on 6/3/2019)
May 22, 2019 Opinion or Order Filing 10 CASE MANAGEMENT SCHEDULING ORDER: Initial Case Management Conference set for 8/1/2019 10:00 AM in San Francisco, Courtroom 11, 19th Floor. Case Management Statement due by 7/25/2019. Signed by Judge James Donato on 5/22/19. (lrcS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 5/22/2019)
May 13, 2019 Opinion or Order Filing 9 ORDER REASSIGNING CASE. Case reassigned using a proportionate, random, and blind system pursuant to General Order No. 44 to Judge James Donato for all further proceedings. Magistrate Judge Donna M. Ryu no longer assigned to case, Notice: The assigned judge participates in the Cameras in the Courtroom Pilot Project. See General Order No. 65 and http://cand.uscourts.gov/cameras. Signed by the Clerk on 05/13/2019. (Attachments: #1 Notice of Eligibility for Video Recording)(ajsS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 5/13/2019)
May 10, 2019 Filing 8 CLERK'S NOTICE OF IMPENDING REASSIGNMENT TO A U.S. DISTRICT COURT JUDGE: The Clerk of this Court will now randomly reassign this case to a District Judge because either (1) a party has not consented to the jurisdiction of a Magistrate Judge, or (2) time is of the essence in deciding a pending judicial action for which the necessary consents to Magistrate Judge jurisdiction have not been secured. You will be informed by separate notice of the district judge to whom this case is reassigned. ALL HEARING DATES PRESENTLY SCHEDULED BEFORE THE CURRENT MAGISTRATE JUDGE ARE VACATED AND SHOULD BE RE-NOTICED FOR HEARING BEFORE THE JUDGE TO WHOM THIS CASE IS REASSIGNED. This is a text only docket entry; there is no document associated with this notice. (cjlS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 5/10/2019)
May 10, 2019 Filing 7 CONSENT/DECLINATION to Proceed Before a US Magistrate Judge by U.S. Specialty Insurance Company.. (Elowsky, Jennifer) (Filed on 5/10/2019)
May 2, 2019 Filing 6 Summons Issued as to Branstetter Construction, Inc..(cjlS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 5/2/2019)
May 2, 2019 Filing 5 Initial Case Management Scheduling Order with ADR Deadlines: Case Management Statement due by 7/24/2019. Initial Case Management Conference set for 7/31/2019 01:30 PM in Oakland, Courtroom 4, 3rd Floor. (cjlS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 5/2/2019)
May 1, 2019 Filing 4 Case assigned to Magistrate Judge Donna M. Ryu. Counsel for plaintiff or the removing party is responsible for serving the Complaint or Notice of Removal, Summons and the assigned judge's standing orders and all other new case documents upon the opposing parties. For information, visit E-Filing A New Civil Case at http://cand.uscourts.gov/ecf/caseopening.Standing orders can be downloaded from the court's web page at www.cand.uscourts.gov/judges. Upon receipt, the summons will be issued and returned electronically. Counsel is required to send chambers a copy of the initiating documents pursuant to L.R. 5-1(e)(7). A scheduling order will be sent by Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF) within two business days. Consent/Declination due by 5/15/2019. (as, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 5/1/2019)
May 1, 2019 Filing 3 Proposed Summons. (Elowsky, Jennifer) (Filed on 5/1/2019)
May 1, 2019 Filing 2 Certificate of Interested Entities by U.S. Specialty Insurance Company identifying Corporate Parent Tokio Marine, Other Affiliate Tokio Marine HCC for U.S. Specialty Insurance Company. (Elowsky, Jennifer) (Filed on 5/1/2019)
May 1, 2019 Filing 1 COMPLAINT FOR REFORMATION AND DECLARATORY RELIEF against All Defendants ( Filing fee $ 400, receipt number 0971-13307796.). Filed byU.S. Specialty Insurance Company. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet)(Elowsky, Jennifer) (Filed on 5/1/2019)

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 Northern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: U.S. Specialty Insurance Company v. Branstetter Construction, Inc.
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: U.S. Specialty Insurance Company
Represented By: Jennifer L. Elowsky
Represented By: Brandt Louis Wolkin
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Branstetter Construction, Inc.
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]

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.

Why Is My Information Online?