Suleman v. Juul Labs, Inc. et al
| Haleemeh Suleman |
| eLiquitech, Inc., James Monsees, Altria Enterprises LLC, Speedway LLC, 7-Eleven, Inc., Core-Mark Holding Company, Inc., Eby-Brown Company, LLC, Adam Bowen, Altria Client Services LLC, Riaz Valani, Phillip Morris USA, Inc., McLane Company, Inc., Nicholas Pritzker, Circle K Stores Inc., Altria Group, Inc., Juul Labs, Inc. formerly doing business as PAX Labs, Inc. formerly doing business as Ploom Inc., Mother Murphy's Labs, Inc., Alternative Ingredients, Inc., Hoyoung Huh, Tobacco Technology, Inc. and Altria Group Distribution Company |
| 3:2021cv03381 |
| May 6, 2021 |
| US District Court for the Northern District of California |
| William H Orrick |
| Personal Inj. Prod. Liability |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1332 |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on May 7, 2021. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 4 Summons Issued as to 7-Eleven, Inc., Adam Bowen, Alternative Ingredients, Inc., Altria Client Services LLC, Altria Enterprises LLC, Altria Group Distribution Company, Altria Group, Inc., Circle K Stores Inc., Core-Mark Holding Company, Inc., Eby-Brown Company, LLC, Hoyoung Huh, James Monsees, Juul Labs, Inc., McLane Company, Inc., Mother Murphy's Labs, Inc., Nicholas Pritzker, Phillip Morris USA, Inc., Riaz Valani, Speedway LLC, Tobacco Technology, Inc., eLiquitech, Inc. (mclS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 5/7/2021) |
| #Electronic filing error. E-filer is reminded to enter all parties as named in the Complaint. ALtria Group Distribution Company has been entered on the docket. Corrected b y Clerk's Office. No further action is necessary. Re: #1 Complaint filed by Haleemeh Suleman. (mclS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 5/7/2021) |
| Filing 3 Proposed Summons. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A - List of Defendants to be Served)(Neiman, David) (Filed on 5/6/2021) |
| Filing 2 Case assigned to Judge William H. Orrick. 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. (anjS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 5/6/2021) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT against All Defendants ( Filing fee $ 402, receipt number 0971-15933411.). Filed byHaleemeh Suleman. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet)(Neiman, David) (Filed on 5/6/2021) |
| DIRECT FILE MEMBER CASE OPENED: MDL 2913, Suleman v. Juul Labs, Inc. et al, Opened in California Northern District as 21-cv-03381-WHO cc: JPMDL (mclS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 5/6/2021) |
| Cases associated: Create association to 3:19-md-02913-WHO. (mclS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 5/6/2021) |
| #Electronic filing error. The County Code in the case opening screen has been corrected to "US, Outside State" and NOT San Francisco as it refers to plaintiff's county of residence. Corrected by Clerk's Office. No further action is necessary. Re: #1 Complaint filed by Haleemeh Suleman. (mclS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 5/6/2021) |
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 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.
