Krisco et al v. LinkedIn Corporation
| Livly, Inc. and Drew Krisco |
| LinkedIn Corporation |
| 3:2020cv08204 |
| November 20, 2020 |
| US District Court for the Northern District of California |
| William Alsup |
| Other Fraud |
| 28 U.S.C. § 1332 |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on December 28, 2020. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 22 NOTICE of Voluntary Dismissal without Prejudice by Drew Krisco, Livly, Inc. (Neiman, David) (Filed on 12/28/2020) |
Filing 21
ORDER by Judge William Alsup granting #19 Motion for Pro Hac Vice by David A. Neiman. (amd2S, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 12/3/2020)
|
|
Filing 20
ORDER by Judge William Alsup granting #18 Motion for Pro Hac Vice by Bryce T. Hensley. (amd2S, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 12/3/2020)
|
| Filing 19 Second MOTION for leave to appear in Pro Hac Vice ( Filing fee $ 317, receipt number 0971-15268541.) Filing fee previously paid on 12/03/2020 filed by Drew Krisco, Livly, Inc.. (Attachments: #1 Certificate of Good Standing)(Neiman, David) (Filed on 12/3/2020) |
| Filing 18 Second MOTION for leave to appear in Pro Hac Vice ( Filing fee $ 317, receipt number 0971-15268455.) Filing fee previously paid on 12/03/2020 filed by Drew Krisco, Livly, Inc.. (Attachments: #1 Certificate of Good Standing)(Hensley, Bryce) (Filed on 12/3/2020) |
|
Filing 17
ORDER by Judge William Alsup denying #15 Motion for Pro Hac Vice by David A. Neiman. (amd2S, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 12/3/2020)
|
|
Filing 16
ORDER by Judge William Alsup denying #14 Motion for Pro Hac Vice by Bryce T. Hensley. (amd2S, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 12/3/2020)
|
| Filing 15 MOTION for leave to appear in Pro Hac Vice ( Filing fee $ 317, receipt number 0971-15268541.) filed by Drew Krisco, Livly, Inc.. (Attachments: #1 Certificate of Good Standing)(Neiman, David) (Filed on 12/3/2020) |
| Filing 14 MOTION for leave to appear in Pro Hac Vice ( Filing fee $ 317, receipt number 0971-15268455.) filed by Drew Krisco, Livly, Inc.. (Attachments: #1 Certificate of Good Standing)(Hensley, Bryce) (Filed on 12/3/2020) |
| Filing 13 CLERK'S NOTICE SETTING INITIAL CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE ON REASSIGNMENT. The Initial Case Management Conference set for 2/23/2021 is advanced to 2/18/2021 at 11:00 AM before Judge William Alsup. Case Management Statement due by 2/11/2021. Standing orders can be downloaded from the Court's webpage at www.cand.uscourts.gov/whaorders. This proceeding will be held by AT&T Conference Line. The court circulates the following conference number to allow the equivalent of a public hearing by telephone.For conference line information, see: https://apps.cand.uscourts.gov/telhrg/ All counsel, members of the public and press please use the following dial-in information below to access the conference line: Dial In: (888) 684-8852Access Code: 3707514The Court may be in session with proceedings in progress when you connect to the conference line. Therefore, mute your phone if possible and wait for the Court to address you before speaking on the line. For call clarity, parties shall NOT use speaker phone or earpieces for these calls, and where at all possible, parties shall use landlines.PLEASE NOTE: Persons granted access to court proceedings held by telephone or videoconference are reminded that photographing, recording, and rebroadcasting of court proceedings, including screenshots or other visual copying of a hearing, is absolutely prohibited. See General Order 58 at Paragraph III. (This is a text-only entry generated by the court. There is no document associated with this entry.)(amd2S, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/30/2020) Modified on 11/30/2020 (amd2S, COURT STAFF). |
|
Filing 12
NOTICE AND ORDER RE PUTATIVE CLASS ACTIONS AND FACTORS TO BE EVALUATED FOR ANY PROPOSED CLASS SETTLEMENT AND PROTOCOL FOR INTERVIEWING PUTATIVE CLASS MEMBERS Signed by Judge William Alsup on 11/29/2020. (whalc4, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/29/2020)
|
|
Filing 11
ORDER REASSIGNING CASE. Case reassigned using a proportionate, random, and blind system pursuant to General Order No. 44 to Judge William Alsup for all further proceedings. Judge Judge Saundra Brown Armstrong 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 Judge the Clerk on 11/27/2020. (Attachments: #1 Notice of Eligibility for Video Recording)(anjS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/27/2020)
|
|
Filing 10
ORDER OF RECUSAL. Signed by Judge Saundra Brown Armstrong on 11/27/2020. (amgS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/27/2020)
|
| Filing 9 Case REASSIGNED to Judge Saundra Brown Armstrong. Magistrate Judge Caseload Rebalancing Judge Susan Van Keulen no longer assigned to case. (bwS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/25/2020) (bwS, COURT STAFF). |
| Filing 8 This case will be randomly reassigned to a District Judge outside the San Jose Division pursuant to the Caseload Rebalancing Pilot Program approved by the Court effective March 1, 2018. For information, visit our web page at #http://cand.uscourts.gov/news/225. (bwS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/25/2020) |
| Filing 7 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. (jhfS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/25/2020) |
| Filing 6 CONSENT/DECLINATION to Proceed Before a US Magistrate Judge by Drew Krisco, Livly, Inc... (Logan, Todd) (Filed on 11/24/2020) |
| Filing 5 Summons Issued as to LinkedIn Corporation. (cv, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/23/2020) |
| Filing 4 Initial Case Management Scheduling Order with ADR Deadlines: Case Management Statement due by 2/16/2021. Initial Case Management Conference set for 2/23/2021 09:30 AM in San Jose, Courtroom 6, 4th Floor. (cv, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/23/2020) |
| Filing 3 Case assigned to Magistrate Judge Susan van Keulen. 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 12/4/2020. (bwS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/20/2020) |
| Filing 2 Proposed Summons. (Balabanian, Rafey) (Filed on 11/20/2020) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT against LinkedIn Corporation ( Filing fee $ 400, receipt number 0971-15224248.). Filed byDrew Krisco, Livly, Inc.. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet)(Balabanian, Rafey) (Filed on 11/20/2020) |
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.
