Hayes et al v. Monsanto Company
| Robin Hayes and Patrick Hayes |
| Monsanto Company |
| 3:2021cv05398 |
| July 14, 2021 |
| US District Court for the Northern District of California |
| Vince Chhabria |
| Personal Inj. Prod. Liability |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1332 |
| Both |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on July 15, 2021. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 7 Corporate Disclosure Statement by Monsanto Company identifying Other Affiliate Bayer AG for Monsanto Company. [Plaintiff Robin Hayes et al.] (Walker-Stubbs, Jennise) (Filed on 7/15/2021) |
| Filing 6 Certificate of Interested Entities by Monsanto Company identifying Other Affiliate Bayer AG for Monsanto Company. [Plaintiff Robin Hayes et al.] (Walker-Stubbs, Jennise) (Filed on 7/15/2021) |
| Filing 5 Monsanto Company's ANSWER to Complaint with Jury Demand [Plaintiff Robin Hayes et al.] byMonsanto Company. (Walker-Stubbs, Jennise) (Filed on 7/15/2021) |
| Filing 4 Case transferred in from District of Illinois Central; Case Number 3:21-cv-03130. Original file certified copy of transfer order and docket sheet received. |
| MEMBER CASE OPENED: re 3:16-md-02741-VC; Central District of Illinois, 3:21-cv-03130-SEM-TEH Hayes v Monsanto Company, opened in California Northern District as 3:21-cv-05398-VC pursuant to Conditional Transfer Order 277 cc: JPMDL (wsnS-adi, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 7/15/2021) |
| Filing 3 Conditional Transfer Order entered by Clerk, MDL Panel, transferring this case to the Northern District of California. This case is terminated. (ME) |
| MDL Remark: MINUTE ORDER - TO INVOLVED CLERKS - Conditional Transfer Order (CTO-277) Finalized on 7/9/21. Please see pleading (3 in CAC/2:21-cv-03296, 3 in CAC/2:21-cv-03297, 3 in CAC/2:21-cv-03299, 3 in CAC/2:21-cv-03301, 3 in CAC/8:21-cv-00678, 3 in CAE/1:21-cv-00615, 3 in CAE/1:21-cv-00642, 3 in CAE/2:21-cv-00687, 3 in ILC/3:21-cv-03130, 3 in LAE/2:21-cv-01257, 3 in LAM/3:21-cv-00375, 2375 in MDL No. 2741, 3 in MSS/1:21-cv-00224, 3 in NYW/1:21-cv-00763, 3 in NYW/1:21-cv-00764, 3 in NYW/1:21-cv-00765, 3 in OHS/3:21-cv-00049).As stipulated in Rule 7.1(c) of the Rules of Procedure of the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation, transmittal of the order has been stayed 7 days to give any party an opportunity to oppose the transfer.The 7-day period has now elapsed, no opposition was received, and the order is directed to the Clerk of the United States District Court for the N.D. California for filing. The Panel governing statute, 28 U.S.C. 1407, requires that the transferee clerk transmit a certified copy of the Panel order to transfer to the clerk of the district court from which the action is being transferred.Signed by Clerk of the Panel John W. Nichols on 7/9/2021.Associated Cases: MDL No. 2741, CAC/2:21-cv-03296, CAC/2:21-cv-03297, CAC/2:21-cv-03299, CAC/2:21-cv-03301, CAC/8:21-cv-00678, CAE/1:21-cv-00615, CAE/1:21-cv-00642, CAE/2:21-cv-00687, ILC/3:21-cv-03130, LAE/2:21-cv-01257, LAM/3:21-cv-00375, MSS/1:21-cv-00224, NYW/1:21-cv-00763, NYW/1:21-cv-00764, NYW/1:21-cv-00765, OHS/3:21-cv-00049 (CMD) (ME) |
| Filing 2 Summons Issued as to Monsanto Company. Original returned to Attorney Carolyn S. Daley to effectuate service. (GL) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT against All Defendants ( Filing fee $ 402 receipt number AILCDC-3683803.), filed by Patrick Hayes, Robin Hayes. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet civil cover sheet)(Daley, Carolyn) |
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.
