Ottesen et al v. Hi-Tech Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
Plaintiff: Allison Ottesen, Sean Allen and Lauren Accardi
Defendant: Hi-Tech Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
Case Number: 4:2019cv07271
Filed: November 4, 2019
Court: US District Court for the Northern District of California
Presiding Judge: Jon S Tigar
Nature of Suit: Other Fraud
Cause of Action: 28:1332
Jury Demanded By: Plaintiff
Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on December 30, 2019. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
December 30, 2019 Filing 16 MOTION to Dismiss filed by Hi-Tech Pharmaceuticals, Inc.. Motion Hearing set for 2/5/2020 02:00 PM in Oakland, Courtroom 6, 2nd Floor before Judge Jon S. Tigar. Responses due by 1/13/2020. Replies due by 1/21/2020. (Attachments: #1 Declaration David J. Marck, #2 Proposed Order)(Prager, David) (Filed on 12/30/2019)
December 30, 2019 Filing 15 MOTION to Stay or, in the alternative, MOTION to Strike Portions of Plaintiffs' Complaint filed by Hi-Tech Pharmaceuticals, Inc.. Motion Hearing set for 2/5/2020 02:00 PM in Oakland, Courtroom 6, 2nd Floor before Judge Jon S. Tigar. Responses due by 1/13/2020. Replies due by 1/21/2020. (Attachments: #1 Declaration David J. Marck, Esq., #2 Proposed Order)(Prager, David) (Filed on 12/30/2019)
December 6, 2019 Filing 14 CLERK'S NOTICE SETTING CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERNECE. Case Management Statement due by 2/25/2020 by 5:00 PM. Initial Case Management Conference set for 3/3/2020 02:00 PM in Oakland, Courtroom 6, 2nd Floor. (mllS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 12/6/2019)
November 22, 2019 Opinion or Order Filing 13 ORDER REASSIGNING CASE. Case reassigned using a proportionate, random, and blind system pursuant to General Order No. 44 to Judge Jon S. Tigar for all further proceedings. Magistrate Judge Donna M. Ryu 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 the Clerk on 11/22/2019. (Attachments: #1 Notice of Eligibility for Video Recording)(ajsS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/22/2019)
November 21, 2019 Filing 12 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. (ig, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/21/2019)
November 20, 2019 Filing 11 STIPULATION re #1 Complaint, #6 Summons Returned Executed to Extend Defendant's Time to Respond to Complaint filed by Hi-Tech Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Lauren Accardi, Allison Ottesen and Sean Allen. (Sullivan, Kevin) (Filed on 11/20/2019) Modified on 11/21/2019 (jmlS, COURT STAFF).
November 20, 2019 Filing 10 CONSENT/DECLINATION to Proceed Before a US Magistrate Judge by Hi-Tech Pharmaceuticals, Inc... (Sullivan, Kevin) (Filed on 11/20/2019)
November 20, 2019 Filing 9 Certificate of Interested Entities by Hi-Tech Pharmaceuticals, Inc. identifying Other Affiliate Jared Wheat, Other Affiliate Dave Nelson for Hi-Tech Pharmaceuticals, Inc.. (Sullivan, Kevin) (Filed on 11/20/2019)
November 20, 2019 Filing 8 NOTICE of Appearance by Kevin Dennis Sullivan and David Matthew Prager (Sullivan, Kevin) (Filed on 11/20/2019)
November 20, 2019 Filing 7 CLERK'S NOTICE TO PLAINTIFFS Re: Consent or Declination: Plaintiffs shall file a consent or declination to proceed before a magistrate judge. 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. Consent/Declination due by 12/4/2019. (ig, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/20/2019)
November 13, 2019 Filing 6 SUMMONS Returned Executed by Allison Ottesen, Lauren Accardi, Sean Allen. Hi-Tech Pharmaceuticals, Inc. served on 11/7/2019, answer due 11/29/2019. (Fisher, L) (Filed on 11/13/2019)
November 5, 2019 Filing 5 Initial Case Management Scheduling Order with ADR Deadlines: Case Management Statement due by 1/29/2020. Initial Case Management Conference set for 2/5/2020 01:30 PM in Oakland, Courtroom 4, 3rd Floor. (jmlS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/5/2019)
November 5, 2019 Filing 4 Summons Issued as to Hi-Tech Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (jmlS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/5/2019)
November 5, 2019 Filing 3 Case assigned to Magistrate Judge Donna M. Ryu. 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 11/19/2019. (ajsS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/5/2019)
November 4, 2019 Filing 2 Proposed Summons. (Fisher, Lawrence) (Filed on 11/4/2019)
November 4, 2019 Filing 1 COMPLAINT (with jury demand) against Hi-Tech Pharmaceuticals, Inc. ( Filing fee $ 400, receipt number 0971-13854979.). Filed by Allison Ottesen, Lauren Accardi, Sean Allen. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet)(Fisher, Lawrence) (Filed on 11/4/2019) Modified on 11/5/2019 (jmlS, 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 this case: Ottesen et al v. Hi-Tech Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Allison Ottesen
Represented By: Lawrence Timothy Fisher
Represented By: L Timothy Fisher
Represented By: Scott Bursor
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Sean Allen
Represented By: Lawrence Timothy Fisher
Represented By: L Timothy Fisher
Represented By: Scott Bursor
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Lauren Accardi
Represented By: Lawrence Timothy Fisher
Represented By: L Timothy Fisher
Represented By: Scott Bursor
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Hi-Tech Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
Represented By: David Matthew Prager
Represented By: Kevin Dennis Sullivan
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]

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.


Why Is My Information Online?