Mary Ann Bathe et al v. United States Department of the Army et al
Plaintiff: Brian Bathe, David Bathe and Mary Ann Bathe
Defendant: United States of America and United States Department of the Army
Case Number: 5:2020cv01574
Filed: March 3, 2020
Court: US District Court for the Northern District of California
Presiding Judge: Virginia K DeMarchi
Referring Judge: Lucy H Koh
Nature of Suit: Motor Vehicle
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1346
Jury Demanded By: None
Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on March 16, 2021. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
April 15, 2020 Filing 36 NOTICE of Substitution of Counsel re #36 by James A. Scharf (Scharf, James) (Filed on 4/15/2020)
April 15, 2020 Filing 35 **CLERK'S NOTICE FOLLOWING CASE REASSIGNMENT TO THE HONORABLE LUCY H. KOH** Following the case reassignment to the Honorable Lucy H. Koh, an Initial Case Management Conference is set for June 10, 2020 at 2:00 PM in Courtroom 8, 4th floor, in San Jose, California. The Joint Case Management Statement is due seven days prior to the Initial Case Management Conference. See Civil L.R. 16-9 and Civil L.R. 16-10(a). The parties shall familiarize themselves with the Scheduling Notes and Standing Orders for the Hon. Lucy H. Koh: http://cand.uscourts.gov/lhk. (This is a text-only entry generated by the court. There is no document associated with this entry.) (kedS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/15/2020)
April 14, 2020 Filing 34 NOTICE of Substitution of Counsel by James A. Scharf and Proposed Order (Scharf, James) (Filed on 4/14/2020)
April 14, 2020 Opinion or Order Filing 33 ORDER REASSIGNING CASE. Case reassigned using a proportionate, random, and blind system pursuant to General Order No. 44 to Judge Lucy H. Koh for all further proceedings. Notice: The assigned judge participates in the Cameras in the Courtroom Pilot Project. See General Order No. 65 and http://cand.uscourts.gov/cameras. Magistrate Judge Virginia K. DeMarchi remains as referral judge assigned to case. Reassignment Order signed by Clerk on 4/14/2020. (Attachments: #1 Notice of Eligibility for Video Recording)(bwS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/14/2020)
April 14, 2020 Filing 32 STIPULATION WITH PROPOSED ORDER filed by United States of America. (Scharf, James) (Filed on 4/14/2020)
April 14, 2020 Filing 31 CONSENT/DECLINATION to Proceed Before a US Magistrate Judge by United States of America.. (Scharf, James) (Filed on 4/14/2020)
March 24, 2020 Filing 30 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. (pmcS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 3/24/2020)
March 24, 2020 Filing 29 CONSENT/DECLINATION to Proceed Before a US Magistrate Judge by Brian Bathe, David Bathe, Mary Ann Bathe.. (Liggett, Bradley) (Filed on 3/24/2020)
March 3, 2020 Filing 28 Initial Case Management Scheduling Order with ADR Deadlines: Case Management Statement due by 5/26/2020. Initial Case Management Conference set for 6/2/2020 01:30 PM in San Jose, Courtroom 2, 5th Floor. (dhmS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 3/3/2020)
February 28, 2020 Opinion or Order Filing 26 ORDER RE STIPULATION TO TRANSFER VENUE OF ACTION TO NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA by Judge Dolly M. Gee: Upon the parties' Stipulation #25 and consent, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. Section 1404(a), this action is transferred to the United States District Court for the Northern District of California. All scheduled dates and deadlines are VACATED. Case electronically transferred. (MD JS-6. Case Terminated.) (gk)
February 25, 2020 Filing 25 STIPULATION to Transfer Case to Northern District of California filed by Defendant United States of America. (Attachments: #1 Proposed Order)(Zatz, Julie)
October 10, 2019 Opinion or Order Filing 24 ORDER/REFERRAL to ADR Procedure No 3 by Judge Dolly M. Gee. Case ordered to a private mediator based upon a stipulation of the parties or by the court order. ADR Proceeding to be held no later than 5/26/2020. Joint status report re settlement due by 6/2/2020. (gk)
October 10, 2019 Opinion or Order Filing 23 SCHEDULING AND CASE MANAGEMENT ORDER FOR COURT TRIAL by Judge Dolly M. Gee. Final Pretrial Conference set for 6/23/2020 02:00 PM before Judge Dolly M. Gee. Bench Trial set for 7/21/2020 09:30 AM before Judge Dolly M. Gee. See document for further details. (Attachments: #1 Schedule of Pretrial and Trial Dates) (gk)
October 2, 2019 Opinion or Order Filing 22 ORDER TO CONTINUE SCHEDULING CONFERENCE by Judge Dolly M. Gee: Upon Stipulation #21 , the Court has reviewed the parties' Joint Rule 26(f) Report and has determined that the Scheduling Conference, currently set for 10/18/2019 is not necessary and therefore is hereby VACATED. The Court will issue a Scheduling and Case Management Order for court trial in consideration of the parties' proposed dates and deadlines. (gk)
September 30, 2019 Filing 21 First STIPULATION for Order To Continue Scheduling Conference filed by Plaintiffs Brian Bathe, David Bathe, Mary Ann Bathe. (Attachments: #1 Proposed Order)(Liggett, Bradley)
September 23, 2019 Filing 20 JOINT REPORT Rule 26(f) Discovery Plan ; estimated length of trial 2-3 days, filed by Defendant United States of America.. (Attachments: #1 Schedule of Pretrial and Trial Dates Worksheet)(Zatz, Julie)
September 5, 2019 Filing 19 SCHEDULING MEETING OF COUNSEL [Fed. R. Civ. P. 16, 26(f)] by Judge Dolly M. Gee. Rule 26 Meeting Report due by 10/4/2019. Scheduling Conference set for 10/18/2019 at 9:30 a.m. (See order for details.) (kti)
September 5, 2019 Filing 18 ANSWER to Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening), #1 filed by Defendant United States of America.(Zatz, Julie)
August 28, 2019 Filing 17 NOTICE OF DISMISSAL filed by Plaintiffs Mary Ann Bathe, Brian Bathe, David Bathe pursuant to FRCP 41a(1) as to United States Department of the Army. (Liggett, Bradley)
August 22, 2019 Opinion or Order Filing 16 ORDER CORRECTING CAPTION by Judge Dolly M. Gee: The Court, having received a Notice of Substitution #14 , IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that The name of Defendant Devon Hicks shall be deleted from the caption of this case; The United States of America shall be inserted in the caption in place and instead of Devon Hicks; The Order to Show Cause dated 8/12/2019 #12 is discharged. See document for further details. (gk)
August 22, 2019 Filing 15 DECLARATION of Bradley D. Liggett filed by Plaintiffs Brian Bathe, David Bathe, Mary Ann Bathe. (Attachments: #1 Supplement)(Liggett, Bradley)
August 21, 2019 Filing 14 NOTICE OF SUBSTITUTION filed by Federal Defendants United States Department of the Army, United States of America. (Attachments: #1 Proposed Order)(Zatz, Julie)
August 20, 2019 Filing 13 PROOF OF SERVICE Executed by Plaintiff Mary Ann Bathe, Brian Bathe, David Bathe, upon Defendant Service of the Summons and Complaint were executed upon Devon Hicks, Individual in compliance with Federal Rules of Civil Procedure by personal service.Original Summons returned. (Liggett, Bradley)
August 12, 2019 Opinion or Order Filing 12 MINUTES OF IN CHAMBERS - ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE RE: DISMISSAL FOR LACK OF PROSECUTION by Judge Dolly M. Gee: The Court, on its own motion, orders plaintiff(s) to show cause in writing on or before 8/26/2019 why this action should not be dismissed as to defendant Devon Hicks for lack of prosecution. As an alternative to a written response by plaintiff(s), the Court will consider the filing of one of the following, as an appropriate response to this Order To Show Cause, on or before the above date, as evidence that the matter is being prosecuted diligently: An answer by the following defendant(s): Devon Hicks; or, Plaintiff's application for entry of default pursuant to Rule 55a of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The Order will stand submitted upon the filing of a responsive pleading or motion on or before the date upon which a response by plaintiff(s) is due. This action will be dismissed as to defendant Devon Hicks if the above-mentioned document(s) are not filed by the date indicated above. Court Reporter: Not Reported. (gk)
August 7, 2019 Filing 11 PROOF OF SERVICE Executed by Plaintiff Mary Ann Bathe, Brian Bathe, David Bathe, upon Defendant United States of America served on 7/31/2019, answer due 9/30/2019. Service of the Summons and Complaint were executed upon the United States Attorneys Office by delivering a copy to Flabia De La Rosa, Legal Assistant. Executed upon the Attorney Generals Office of the United States by delivering a copy to Front Desk Reception. Service was executed in compliance with California Code of Civil Procedure. Due diligence declaration NOT attached. Registered or certified mail return receipt NOT attached. Original Summons NOT returned. Liggett, Bradley (Attachments: #1 Supplement)(Liggett, Bradley)
August 7, 2019 Filing 10 PROOF OF SERVICE Executed by Plaintiff Mary Ann Bathe, Brian Bathe, David Bathe, upon Defendant United States Department of the Army served on 7/24/2019, answer due 9/23/2019. Service of the Summons and Complaint were executed upon the United States Attorneys Office by delivering a copy to Lt. Col. Patrick Grant, Chief of Litigation Division. Service was executed in compliance with California Code of Civil Procedure. Due diligence declaration NOT attached. Registered or certified mail return receipt NOT attached. Original Summons NOT returned. Liggett, Bradley (Liggett, Bradley)
August 7, 2019 Filing 9 PROOF OF SERVICE Executed by Plaintiff Mary Ann Bathe, Brian Bathe, David Bathe, upon Defendant Devon Hicks served on 7/10/2019, answer due 7/31/2019. Service of the Summons and Complaint were executed upon Devon Hicks, Defendant in compliance with California Code of Civil Procedure by personal service.Original Summons NOT returned. Liggett, Bradley (Liggett, Bradley)
June 11, 2019 Opinion or Order Filing 8 INITIAL STANDING ORDER upon filing of the complaint by Judge Dolly M. Gee. (kti)
June 10, 2019 Filing 7 60 DAY Summons Issued re Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening), #1 as to Defendants Devon Hicks, United States Department of the Army, United States of America. (car)
June 10, 2019 Filing 6 NOTICE TO PARTIES OF COURT-DIRECTED ADR PROGRAM filed. (car)
June 10, 2019 Filing 5 NOTICE OF ASSIGNMENT to District Judge Dolly M. Gee and Magistrate Judge Michael R. Wilner. (car)
June 7, 2019 Filing 4 NOTICE of Interested Parties filed by Plaintiffs Brian Bathe, David Bathe, Mary Ann Bathe, (Liggett, Bradley)
June 7, 2019 Filing 3 Request for Clerk to Issue Summons on Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening), #1 , Civil Cover Sheet (CV-71) #2 filed by Plaintiffs Brian Bathe, David Bathe, Mary Ann Bathe. (Liggett, Bradley)
June 7, 2019 Filing 2 CIVIL COVER SHEET filed by Plaintiffs Brian Bathe, David Bathe, Mary Ann Bathe. (Liggett, Bradley)
June 7, 2019 Filing 1 COMPLAINT Receipt No: 0973-23879804 - Fee: $400, filed by Plaintiffs Mary Ann Bathe, Brian Bathe, David Bathe. (Attorney Bradley David Liggett added to party Brian Bathe(pty:pla), Attorney Bradley David Liggett added to party David Bathe(pty:pla), Attorney Bradley David Liggett added to party Mary Ann Bathe(pty:pla))(Liggett, Bradley)

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: Mary Ann Bathe et al v. United States Department of the Army et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Brian Bathe
Represented By: Bradley David Liggett
Represented By: Ryan D. Harris
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: David Bathe
Represented By: Bradley David Liggett
Represented By: Ryan D. Harris
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: Mary Ann Bathe
Represented By: Bradley David Liggett
Represented By: Ryan D. Harris
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: United States of America
Represented By: Julie Zatz
Represented By: James A. Scharf
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: United States Department of the Army
Represented By: Julie Zatz
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?