Stavis v. One Technologies
Plaintiff / Appellee: Myles Stavis
Defendant / Appellant: One Technologies, L.L.C.
Case Number: 22-10764
Filed: August 11, 2022
Court: U.S. Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit
Nature of Suit: Interstate Commerce
Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on September 12, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
September 12, 2022 APPEARANCE FORM FILED by Attorney Kelli Benham Bills for Appellant One Technologies, L.L.C. in 22-10764, by Attorney(s) Kelli Benham Bills for party(s) Appellant One Technologies Management, L.L.C. Appellant One Technologies Capital, L.L.P. Appellant One Technologies, L.P., in case 22-10770 [22-10770, 22-10764] (RSM) [Entered: 09/12/2022 07:58 AM]
September 12, 2022 APPEARANCE FORM FILED by Attorney(s) Alan Dabdoub for party(s) Appellant One Technologies Management, L.L.C. Appellant One Technologies Capital, L.L.P. Appellant One Technologies, L.P., in case 22-10770 [22-10770, 22-10764] (RSM) [Entered: 09/12/2022 12:13 PM]
September 12, 2022 APPEARANCE FORM FILED by Attorney(s) Daniel Polese for party(s) Appellant One Technologies Management, L.L.C. Appellant One Technologies Capital, L.L.P. Appellant One Technologies, L.P., in case 22-10770 [22-10770, 22-10764] (RSM) [Entered: 09/12/2022 12:20 PM]
September 9, 2022 CLERK ORDER granting Motion to consolidate cases filed by Appellants One Technologies, L.P., One Technologies Management, L.L.C. and One Technologies Capital, L.L.P. [ # 9934622-2 ] in 22-10770; granting Motion to extend time to file appellant's brief filed by Appellants One Technologies, L.P., One Technologies Management, L.L.C. and One Technologies Capital, L.L.P. [ # 9934622-3 ] in 22-10770 A/Pet's Brief deadline updated to 11/03/2022 for Appellants One Technologies Capital, L.L.P., One Technologies Management, L.L.C. and One Technologies, L.P.; to extend time to file brief as appellant until 11/03/2022 [9936395-2] A/Pet's Brief deadline updated to 11/03/2022 for Appellant One Technologies, L.L.C. [22-10770, 22-10764] (RSM) [Entered: 09/09/2022 01:42 PM]
September 9, 2022 APPEARANCE FORM FILED by Attorney Andrew Patrick LeGrand for Appellant One Technologies, L.L.C. in 22-10764 [22-10764, 22-10770] (CBW) [Entered: 09/09/2022 03:02 PM]
September 9, 2022 APPEARANCE FORM FILED by Attorney(s) Daniel Polese for party(s) Appellant One Technologies, L.L.C., in case 22-10764 [22-10764, 22-10770] (CBW) [Entered: 09/09/2022 03:05 PM]
September 9, 2022 APPEARANCE FORM FILED by Attorney(s) Alan Dabdoub for party(s) Appellant One Technologies, L.L.C., in case 22-10764 [22-10764, 22-10770] (CBW) [Entered: 09/09/2022 04:40 PM]
September 9, 2022 APPEARANCE FORM FILED by Attorney Jonathan Ryan Childers for Appellant One Technologies, L.L.C. in 22-10764 [22-10764, 22-10770] (CBW) [Entered: 09/09/2022 04:37 PM]
September 8, 2022 APPEARANCE FORM received from Mr. Andrew Patrick LeGrand for One Technologies, L.L.C. for the court's review. Lead Counsel? No. [22-10764] (Andrew Patrick LeGrand ) [Entered: 09/08/2022 01:22 PM]
September 8, 2022 APPEARANCE FORM for the court's review. Lead Counsel? No. [22-10764] (Jonathan Ryan Childers ) [Entered: 09/08/2022 05:18 PM]
September 8, 2022 APPEARANCE FORM for the court's review. Lead Counsel? No. [22-10764] (Daniel Polese ) [Entered: 09/08/2022 05:36 PM]
September 8, 2022 APPEARANCE FORM for the court's review. Lead Counsel? No. [22-10764] (Alan Dabdoub ) [Entered: 09/08/2022 05:30 PM]
August 29, 2022 DOCUMENT RECEIVED - NO ACTION TAKEN. No action will be taken at this time on the appearance form filed by Anne Johnson. received from Appellant One Technologies, L.L.C. because this form is a duplicate. Appearance form has already been filed. [22-10764] (CBW) [Entered: 08/29/2022 04:25 PM]
August 26, 2022 BRIEFING NOTICE ISSUED A/Pet's Brief Due on 10/05/2022 for Appellant One Technologies, L.L.C.. [22-10764] (DDL) [Entered: 08/26/2022 03:19 PM]
August 26, 2022 ELECTRONIC RECORD ON APPEAL FILED. Admitted Exhibits on File in District Court? No. Video/Audio Exhibits on File in District Court? No Electronic ROA deadline satisfied. [22-10764] (DDL) [Entered: 08/26/2022 03:19 PM]
August 25, 2022 APPEARANCE FORM FILED by Attorney David Nelson for Appellee Myles Stavis in 22-10764 [22-10764] (CBW) [Entered: 08/25/2022 08:34 AM]
August 25, 2022 APPEARANCE FORM FILED by Attorney(s) Anne McGowan Johnson for party(s) Appellant One Technologies, L.L.C., in case 22-10764 [22-10764] (CBW) [Entered: 08/25/2022 08:37 AM]
August 25, 2022 APPEARANCE FORM FILED by Attorney Stuart L. Cochran for Appellee Myles Stavis in 22-10764 [22-10764] (CBW) [Entered: 08/25/2022 08:39 AM]
August 24, 2022 APPEARANCE FORM received from Mr. Stuart L. Cochran for Mr. Myles Stavis for the court's review. Lead Counsel? No. [22-10764] (Stuart L. Cochran ) [Entered: 08/24/2022 11:18 AM]
August 24, 2022 TRANSCRIPT ORDER received from Appellant One Technologies, L.L.C. advising transcript unnecessary for appeal purposes. Date of Service: 08/24/2022 via email - Attorney for Appellants: Bills, Childers, LeGrand, Tillotson; Attorney for Appellees: Cochran, Nelson [22-10764] (Kelli Benham Bills ) [Entered: 08/24/2022 11:30 AM]
August 23, 2022 APPEARANCE FORM FILED by Attorney(s) Kelli Benham Bills for party(s) Appellant One Technologies, L.L.C., in case 22-10764 [22-10764] (CBW) [Entered: 08/23/2022 09:22 AM]
August 23, 2022 APPEARANCE FORM for the court's review. Lead Counsel? Yes. [22-10764] (Anne McGowan Johnson ) [Entered: 08/23/2022 10:30 AM]
August 22, 2022 APPEARANCE FORM received from Mr. David Nelson for Mr. Myles Stavis for the court's review. Lead Counsel? Yes. [22-10764] (David Nelson ) [Entered: 08/22/2022 01:32 PM]
August 22, 2022 Attorney Anne Johnson is advised to resubmit an appearance form. Reason: The submitted appearance form does not match the registered attorney. [22-10764] (LBM) [Entered: 08/22/2022 04:24 PM]
August 19, 2022 APPEARANCE FORM for the court's review. Lead Counsel? Yes. [22-10764] (Kelli Benham Bills ) [Entered: 08/19/2022 01:32 PM]
August 19, 2022 APPEARANCE FORM for the court's review. Lead Counsel? No. [22-10764] (Kelli Benham Bills ) [Entered: 08/19/2022 01:33 PM]
August 15, 2022 INITIAL CASE CHECK by Attorney Advisor complete. Action: Case OK to Process. [9915487-2] Initial AA Check Due satisfied. [22-10764] (CBW) [Entered: 08/15/2022 09:03 AM]
August 15, 2022 ELECTRONIC RECORD ON APPEAL REQUESTED from District Court for 3:21-CV-2753. Electronic ROA due on 08/30/2022. [22-10764] (CBW) [Entered: 08/15/2022 09:06 AM]
August 11, 2022 PRIVATE CIVIL FEDERAL CASE docketed. NOA filed by Appellant One Technologies, L.L.C. [22-10764] (AS) [Entered: 08/11/2022 10:27 AM]

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.

Search for this case: Stavis v. One Technologies
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff / appellee: Myles Stavis
Represented By: Stuart L. Cochran
Represented By: David Nelson
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 / appellant: One Technologies, L.L.C.
Represented By: Jonathan Ryan Childers Esq.
Represented By: Andrew Patrick LeGrand
Represented By: Jeffrey M. Tillotson
Represented By: Anne McGowan Johnson
Represented By: Kelli Benham Bills
Represented By: Alan Dabdoub Esq.
Represented By: Daniel Polese
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?