Freeman v. Summit Filtration Technology, LLC et al
| Michael D. Freeman |
| Summit Filtration Technology, LLC, Peak Partnership, LLC and Stanley E. Kieffer |
| 3:2021cv06838 |
| September 2, 2021 |
| US District Court for the Northern District of California |
| Jacqueline Scott Corley |
| Civil Rights: Jobs |
| 28 U.S.C. § 1332 |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on January 27, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 24 REPLY (re #19 MOTION to Dismiss or, In the Alternative, to Transfer Venue ) filed byStanley E. Kieffer. (Attachments: #1 Declaration of Stanley Kieffer)(Saxon, Andrew) (Filed on 10/28/2021) |
| Filing 23 Brief re #22 MOTION to Strike #18 Answer to Amended Complaint (Affirmative Defenses 1 Through 4, 6 and 7) filed byMichael D. Freeman. (Related document(s) #22 ) (Wilson, Mark) (Filed on 10/21/2021) |
| Filing 22 MOTION to Strike #18 Answer to Amended Complaint (Affirmative Defenses 1 Through 4, 6 and 7) filed by Michael D. Freeman. Motion Hearing set for 12/2/2021 09:00 AM in San Francisco, - Videoconference Only before Magistrate Judge Jacqueline Scott Corley. Responses due by 11/4/2021. Replies due by 11/12/2021. (Attachments: #1 Proposed Order)(Wilson, Mark) (Filed on 10/21/2021) |
| Filing 21 DECLARATION of Michael D. Freeman in Opposition to #20 Opposition/Response to Motion to Dismiss or Transfer Venue, filed byMichael D. Freeman. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit 1, #2 Exhibit 2, #3 Exhibit 3)(Related document(s) #20 ) (Wilson, Mark) (Filed on 10/21/2021) |
| Filing 20 OPPOSITION/RESPONSE (re #19 MOTION to Dismiss or, In the Alternative, to Transfer Venue ) filed byMichael D. Freeman. (Attachments: #1 Declaration of Michael D. Freeman)(Wilson, Mark) (Filed on 10/21/2021) |
| Filing 19 MOTION to Dismiss or, In the Alternative, to Transfer Venue filed by Stanley E. Kieffer, Peak Partnership, LLC, Summit Filtration Technology, LLC. Motion Hearing set for 11/18/2021 09:00 AM in San Francisco, Courtroom E, 15th Floor before Magistrate Judge Jacqueline Scott Corley. Responses due by 10/21/2021. Replies due by 10/28/2021. (Attachments: #1 Memorandum of Points and Authorities, #2 Declaration of Stanley Kieffer, #3 Proposed Order)(Saxon, Andrew) (Filed on 10/7/2021) |
| Filing 18 ANSWER to Amended Complaint bySummit Filtration Technology, LLC. (Saxon, Andrew) (Filed on 10/7/2021) |
Filing 17
ORDER by Magistrate Judge Jacqueline Scott Corley granting #14 Motion for Pro Hac Vice as to Mark Wilson. (ahm, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 10/7/2021)
|
|
Filing 16
ORDER by Magistrate Judge Jacqueline Scott Corley granting #13 Motion for Pro Hac Vice as to Christopher E. Avallone. (ahm, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 10/7/2021)
|
|
Filing 15
ORDER by Magistrate Judge Jacqueline Scott Corley granting #12 Motion for Pro Hac Vice as to Mark Schmidt. (ahm, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 10/7/2021)
|
| Filing 14 MOTION for leave to appear in Pro Hac Vice (Mark E. Wilson for Plaintiff) ( Filing fee $ 317, receipt number 0971-16474623.) filed by Michael D. Freeman. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit Illinois Certificate)(Wilson, Mark) (Filed on 10/7/2021) |
| Filing 13 MOTION for leave to appear in Pro Hac Vice ( Filing fee $ 317, receipt number 0971-16460251.) filed by Stanley E. Kieffer, Peak Partnership, LLC, Summit Filtration Technology, LLC. (Attachments: #1 Certificate of Good Standing)(Avallone, Christopher) (Filed on 10/4/2021) |
| Filing 12 MOTION for leave to appear in Pro Hac Vice ( Filing fee $ 317, receipt number 0971-16460205.) filed by Stanley E. Kieffer, Peak Partnership, LLC, Summit Filtration Technology, LLC. (Attachments: #1 Certificate of Good Standing)(Schmidt, Mark) (Filed on 10/4/2021) |
| Filing 11 CONSENT/DECLINATION to Proceed Before a US Magistrate Judge by Michael D. Freeman.. (Harshman, Dan) (Filed on 9/23/2021) |
| Filing 10 OPPOSITION/RESPONSE (re #5 MOTION to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction ) filed byMichael D. Freeman. (Harshman, Dan) (Filed on 9/23/2021) |
| Filing 9 NOTICE of Appearance for Plaintiff Michael D. Freeman by Dan D. Harshman (Harshman, Dan) (Filed on 9/23/2021) Modified on 9/24/2021 (jlgS, COURT STAFF). |
| Filing 8 AMENDED COMPLAINT against Stanley E. Kieffer, Summit Filtration Technology, LLC. Filed byMichael D. Freeman. (Harshman, Dan) (Filed on 9/23/2021) |
| Filing 7 CONSENT/DECLINATION to Proceed Before a US Magistrate Judge by Stanley E. Kieffer, Peak Partnership, LLC, Summit Filtration Technology, LLC.. (Saxon, Andrew) (Filed on 9/16/2021) |
| Filing 6 CLERK'S NOTICE Re: Consent or Declination: Plaintiff and Defendants shall file a consent or declination to proceed before a magistrate judge by September 23, 2021. Note that any party is free to withhold consent to proceed before a magistrate judge without adverse substantive consequences. The forms are available at: http://cand.uscourts.gov/civilforms. (ahm, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 9/9/2021) |
| Filing 5 MOTION to Dismiss for Lack of Personal Jurisdiction Under Fed. R. Civ. Proc. Rule 12(B)(2) and (6) filed by Stanley E. Kieffer, Peak Partnership, LLC, Summit Filtration Technology, LLC. Motion Hearing set for 10/28/2021 at 9:00 AM in San Francisco, Courtroom E, 15th Floor before Magistrate Judge Jacqueline Scott Corley. Responses due by 9/23/2021. Replies due by 9/30/2021. (Attachments: #1 Memorandum of Points and Authorities, #2 Declaration of Stanley Kieffer, #3 Proposed Order)(Saxon, Andrew) (Filed on 9/9/2021) Modified on 9/10/2021 (jlgS, COURT STAFF). |
| Filing 4 Initial Case Management Scheduling Order with ADR Deadlines: This case may fall within the Initial Discovery Protocols for Employment Cases Alleging Adverse Action. See #General Order 71. Parties and Counsel are directed to review General Order 71 to determine whether it applies to this case, and to comply with that General Order if applicable. Case Management Statement due by 11/25/20 21. Initial Case Management Conference set for 12/2/2021 at 1:30 PM in San Francisco, Courtroom E, 15th Floor. (jlgS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 9/3/2021) |
| Filing 3 Case assigned to Magistrate Judge Jacqueline Scott Corley. 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 9/16/2021. (asS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 9/2/2021) |
| Filing 2 Certificate of Interested Entities by Stanley E. Kieffer, Peak Partnership, LLC, Summit Filtration Technology, LLC (Saxon, Andrew) (Filed on 9/2/2021) |
| Filing 1 NOTICE OF REMOVAL from Alameda County Superior Court. Their case number is HG21103166. (Filing fee $402 receipt number 0971-16350539). Filed byStanley E. Kieffer, Peak Partnership, LLC, Summit Filtration Technology, LLC. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit (1) Summons and Complaint, #2 Exhibit (2) Notice to Superior Court and Parties of Removal, #3 Civil Cover Sheet, #4 Declaration of Andrew E. Saxon in Support of Removal)(Saxon, Andrew) (Filed on 9/2/2021) |
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.
