City of Auburn et al v. McKinsey & Company, Inc. et al
| City of Auburn, City of Waterville, Me, CUMBERLAND COUNTY, M City of Bangor, Me, CUMBERLAND COUNTY, ME, PENOBSCOT COUNTY, ME, CITY OF BIDDEFORD, ME;, WALDO COUNTY, ME, LINCOLN COUNTY, ME;, WASHINGTON COUNTY, ME;, YORK COUNTY, ME, KNOX COUNTY, ME, SOMERSET COUNTY, ME, SAGADAHOC COUNTY, ME, ANDROSCOGGIN COUNTY, ME, CITY OF SACO, ME, CITY OF SANFORD, ME, KENNEBEC COUNTY, ME, AROOSTOOK COUNTY, ME, CITY OF AUGUSTA, ME, CITY OF ROCKLAND, ME, CITY OF CALAIS, ME, CITY OF LEWISTON, ME and CITY OF PORTLAND, ME |
| McKinsey & Company, Inc., McKinsey Holdings, Inc., McKinsey & Company, Inc. United States and McKinsey & Company, Inc. Washington D.C. |
| 3:2022cv04892 |
| August 26, 2022 |
| US District Court for the Northern District of California |
| Charles R Breyer |
| Racketeer/Corrupt Organization |
| 18 U.S.C. ยง 1961 Racketeering (RICO) Act |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on September 1, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 3 WAIVER OF SERVICE Returned Executed filed by KNOX COUNTY, ME, CITY OF CALAIS, ME, WALDO COUNTY, ME, KENNEBEC COUNTY, ME, City of Waterville, Me, CITY OF LEWISTON, ME, City of Auburn, AROOSTOOK COUNTY, ME, SAGADAHOC COUNTY, ME, CITY OF SANFORD, ME, CITY OF PORTLAND, ME, CITY OF BIDDEFORD, ME;, City of Bangor, Me, WASHINGTON COUNTY, ME;, SOMERSET COUNTY, ME, ANDROSCOGGIN COUNTY, ME, CITY OF ROCKLAND, ME, CITY OF SACO, ME, LINCOLN COUNTY, ME;, CUMBERLAND COUNTY, ME, YORK COUNTY, ME, CITY OF AUGUSTA, ME, PENOBSCOT COUNTY, ME. Service waived by All Defendants. (Badala, Salvatore) (Filed on 9/1/2022) |
| #Electronic filing error. NOTICE TO COUNSEL: SHAYNA E. SACKS. The docket shows a different address from what is appearing on the document (dkt. #: 1 Complaint filed by CITY OF SACO, ME, ANDROSCOGGIN COUNTY, ME, WALDO COUNTY, ME, CITY OF LEWISTON, ME, CITY OF AUGUSTA, ME, CITY OF PORTLAND, ME, AROOSTOOK COUNTY, ME, SOMERSET COUNTY, ME, SAGADAHOC COUNTY, ME, CITY OF CALAIS, ME, PENOBSCOT COUNTY, ME, KENNEBEC COUNTY, ME, CITY OF ROCKLAND, ME, CUMBERLAND COUNTY, ME, WASHINGTON COUNTY, ME;, KNOX COUNTY, ME, LINCOLN COUNTY, ME;, CITY OF SANFORD, ME, City of Auburn, City of Bangor, Me, CITY OF BIDDEFORD, ME;, City of Waterville, Me). Please update your personal profile on ECF. |
| DIRECT MEMBER CASE OPENED: MDL 21-2996 Opened in California Northern District as 3:22-cv-4892-CRB cc: JPMDL (jml, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 8/26/2022) |
| Filing 2 Case assigned to Judge Charles R. Breyer. 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. A scheduling order will be sent by Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF) within two business days. (jrs, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 8/26/2022) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT against All Defendants with jury demand ( Filing fee $ 402, receipt number ACANDC-17481445.). Filed by City of Auburn, et al.. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet)(Badala, Salvatore) (Filed on 8/26/2022) Modified on 8/29/2022 (jml, COURT STAFF). |
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.
