Ferrari, et al v. Vitamin Shoppe Industries LLC
| RICHARD FERRARI, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, WILLIAM BOHR and WILLIAM BOHR, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated |
| VITAMIN SHOPPE, INC. and VITAMIN SHOPPE INDUSTRIES LLC, f/k/a Vitamin Shoppe, Inc. |
| 22-1332 |
| May 9, 2022 |
| U.S. Court of Appeals, First Circuit |
| Other Fraud |
Opinions
We have the following opinions for this case:
| Description |
|---|
 Ferrari v. Vitamin Shoppe Industries LLC
|
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on June 8, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| NOTICE issued. The following attorneys have failed to register for an appellate ECF account and will no longer receive notice of court issued documents in this case: Charles J. LaDuca for Richard Ferrari and William Bohr and Brendan S. Thompson for Richard Ferrari and William Bohr. [22-1332] (JAW) [Entered: 06/08/2022 10:10 AM] |
ORDER entered: Appellants William Bohr and Richard Ferrari have filed a joint motion for an extension of time to file their brief and appendix. Upon consideration, the motion is granted to the extent that the deadline for appellants to file a brief and appendix is extended to September 2, 2022 . To the extent the motion also requests extensions of the deadlines for appellee's responsive brief and appellants' reply, those requests are denied without prejudice to renewal because they are premature. The time periods for filing the appellee's responsive brief and appellants' reply have not yet begun to run. See Fed. R. App. P. 31(a)(1); 1st Cir. R. 31.0(a)(1). [22-1332] (JAW) [Entered: 06/01/2022 11:24 AM]
|
| JOINT MOTION to extend time to file brief and appendix filed by Appellants William Bohr and Richard Ferrari. Served on 05/27/2022. [22-1332] (NS) [Entered: 05/27/2022 12:41 PM] |
| NOTICE issued. After 06/07/2022, the following attorneys will no longer receive notice of court issued documents in this case unless they register for an appellate ECF account: Charles J. LaDuca for Richard Ferrari and William Bohr and Brendan S. Thompson for Richard Ferrari and William Bohr. [22-1332] (JAW) [Entered: 05/24/2022 08:41 PM] |
| BRIEFING schedule set. Brief and Appendix due 07/05/2022 for appellant William Bohr and Richard Ferrari. Pursuant to F.R.A.P. 31(a), appellee's brief will be due 30 days following service of appellant's brief and appellant's reply brief will be due 21 days following service of appellee's brief. [22-1332] (JAW) [Entered: 05/23/2022 08:08 PM] |
| TRANSCRIPT report/order form filed by Appellants William Bohr and Richard Ferrari indicating transcripts are not necessary for this appeal. Served on 05/23/2022. [22-1332] (NS) [Entered: 05/23/2022 01:47 PM] |
| DOCKETING statement filed by Appellants William Bohr and Richard Ferrari. Served on 05/23/2022. [22-1332] (NS) [Entered: 05/23/2022 01:44 PM] |
| NOTICE of appearance on behalf of Appellants William Bohr and Richard Ferrari filed by Attorney Nick Suciu III. Served on 05/23/2022. [22-1332] (NS) [Entered: 05/23/2022 01:43 PM] |
| NOTICE of appearance on behalf of Appellee Vitamin Shoppe, Inc. filed by Attorney Michael R. McDonald. Served on 05/16/2022. [22-1332] (MRM) [Entered: 05/16/2022 02:09 PM] |
| NOTICE of appearance on behalf of Appellee Vitamin Shoppe, Inc. filed by Attorney Caroline E. Oks. Served on 05/16/2022. [22-1332] (CEO) [Entered: 05/16/2022 02:11 PM] |
| CIVIL CASE docketed. Notice of appeal (doc. #224) filed by Appellants William Bohr and Richard Ferrari. Appearance form, Docketing Statement, and Transcript Report/Order form due 05/23/2022. [22-1332] (JAW) [Entered: 05/09/2022 10:23 PM] |
Access additional case information on PACER
Access the Case Summary and Docket Report to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
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.
