Lindblad v. Walgreens Corporations et al
| Robert Lindblad |
| Walgreens Corporations, Starbucks Coffee and Arapahoe County |
| 3:2021cv07507 |
| September 27, 2021 |
| US District Court for the Northern District of California |
| Charles R Breyer |
| Thomas S Hixson |
| Contract Product Liability |
| 28 U.S.C. § 1332 |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on November 16, 2021. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 16
ORDER REASSIGNING CASE. Case reassigned using a proportionate, random, and blind system pursuant to General Order No. 44 to Judge Charles R. Breyer for all further proceedings. Magistrate Judge Thomas S. Hixson 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 Clerk on 11/16/21. (Attachments: #1 Notice of Eligibility for Video Recording)(as, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/16/2021)Any non-CM/ECF Participants have been served by First Class Mail to the addresses of record listed on the Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF)
|
| Filing 15 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. (tshlc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/15/2021)Any non-CM/ECF Participants have been served by First Class Mail to the addresses of record listed on the Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF) |
| Filing 14 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS re #11 MOTION for Preliminary Injunction filed by Robert Lindblad, #1 Complaint filed by Robert Lindblad Objections due by 11/29/2021. Signed by Judge Thomas S. Hixson on 11/15/2021. (tshlc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/15/2021)Any non-CM/ECF Participants have been served by First Class Mail to the addresses of record listed on the Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF) |
| Filing 13 RESPONSE TO ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE by Robert Lindblad. (Attachments: #1 Envelope)(ecg, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/8/2021) |
|
Filing 12
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE: Order to Show Cause Hearing set for 12/2/2021 10:00 AM. Show Cause Response due by 11/12/2021. Signed by Judge Thomas S. Hixson on 10/29/2021. (tshlc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 10/29/2021)Any non-CM/ECF Participants have been served by First Class Mail to the addresses of record listed on the Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF)
|
| Filing 11 MOTION for Injunction Under Rule 65 filed by Robert Lindblad. Responses due by 11/12/2021. Replies due by 11/19/2021. (gba, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 10/28/2021) |
|
Filing 10
ORDER re #9 Request for Expert Fees and Lab Work Costs filed by Robert Lindblad. Signed by Judge Thomas S. Hixson on 10/18/2021. (cdnS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 10/18/2021)Any non-CM/ECF Participants have been served by First Class Mail to the addresses of record listed on the Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF)
|
| Filing 9 NOTICE of Pleading Title by Robert Lindblad (Attachments: #1 Envelope) (gbaS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 10/18/2021) |
|
Filing 8
ORDER by Judge Thomas S. Hixson denying as moot #7 Motion to Amend/Correct. (cdnS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 10/4/2021)Any non-CM/ECF Participants have been served by First Class Mail to the addresses of record listed on the Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF)
|
| Filing 7 MOTION to Amend #1 Complaint filed by Robert Lindblad. (Attachments: #1 Envelope) (gbaS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 10/4/2021) |
|
Filing 6
ORDER by Judge Thomas S. Hixson finding as moot #5 Motion to Amend/Correct. (cdnS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 10/1/2021)Any non-CM/ECF Participants have been served by First Class Mail to the addresses of record listed on the Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF)
|
| Filing 5 MOTION to Amend #1 Complaint filed by Robert Lindblad. (Attachments: #1 Envelope) (gbaS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 9/30/2021) |
|
Filing 4
ORDER by Judge Thomas S. Hixson granting #3 Motion for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis and screening complaint. Amended Pleadings due by 10/28/2021. (cdnS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 9/28/2021)Any non-CM/ECF Participants have been served by First Class Mail to the addresses of record listed on the Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF)
|
| Filing 3 MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis filed by Robert Lindblad. (hdjS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 9/27/2021) |
| Filing 2 Initial Case Management Scheduling Order with ADR Deadlines: Case Management Statement due by 12/30/2021. Initial Case Management Conference set for 1/6/2022 10:00 AM in San Francisco, Courtroom G, 15th Floor. (Attachments: #1 resources)(hdjS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 9/27/2021)Any non-CM/ECF Participants have been served by First Class Mail to the addresses of record listed on the Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT against Arapahoe County, Starbucks Coffee, Walgreens Corporations. Filed byRobert Lindblad. Consent/Declination due by 10/12/2021. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet, #2 Envelope)(hdjS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 9/27/2021) |
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.
