Lucas BabinIn re: Lucas Babin
| In re: Lucas Babin |
| Netflix, Incorporated |
| 22-40306 |
| May 11, 2022 |
| U.S. Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit |
| Other |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on May 12, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| RESPONSE/OPPOSITION [9845634-1] to the Motion to stay district court proceedings filed by Petitioner Mr. Lucas Babin in 22-40306 [ # 9844997-2 ] Date of Service: 05/12/2022. [22-40306] REVIEWED AND/OR EDITED - The original text prior to review appeared as follows: RESPONSE/OPPOSITION filed by Netflix, Incorporated [9845634-1] to the to stay district court proceedings filed by Petitioner Mr. Lucas Babin [ # 9844997-2 ] Date of Service: 05/12/2022 via email - Attorney for Respondents: Bennett, Prichard; Attorney for Petitioner: Lindsey. [22-40306] (Joshua J. Bennett ) [Entered: 05/12/2022 11:36 AM] |
| COURT ORDER: IT IS ORDERED that the opposed motion for stay of district court proceedings is GRANTED until further order of this court. Netflix, Inc. is ordered to file a response by 5:00 p.m. on May 13, 2022. We invite the district court to address the petition by 5:00 p.m. on May 18, 2022. [ # 9844997-2 ] [ # 9844940-2 ] [22-40306] (RLL) [Entered: 05/12/2022 12:03 PM] |
| ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS to Petition for writ of mandamus [ # 9844940-2 ] Date of Service: 05/12/2022 [22-40306] REVIEWED AND/OR EDITED - The original text prior to review appeared as follows: APPENDIX FILED by Respondent Netflix, Incorporated Date of Service: 05/12/2022 via email - Attorney for Respondents: Bennett, Prichard; Attorney for Petitioner: Lindsey [22-40306] (Joshua J. Bennett ) [Entered: 05/12/2022 12:40 PM] |
| APPEARANCE FORM FILED by Attorney Joshua J. Bennett for Respondent Netflix, Incorporated in 22-40306 [22-40306] (RLL) [Entered: 05/12/2022 02:29 PM] |
| APPEARANCE FORM for the court's review. Lead Counsel? Yes. [22-40306] (Joshua J. Bennett ) [Entered: 05/12/2022 11:34 AM] |
| JURISDICTIONAL REVIEW COMPLETE. [22-40306] (RLL) [Entered: 05/11/2022 03:33 PM] |
| PETITION filed by Petitioner Mr. Lucas Babin for writ of mandamus [9844940-2] Ruling is requested by: 05/12/2022 Date received in 5th Circuit: 05/11/2022.. Date of Service: 05/11/2022 [22-40306] (RLL) [Entered: 05/11/2022 02:31 PM] |
| EXHIBITS IN SUPPORT of Petition for writ of mandamus [ # 9844940-2 ] filed by Petitioner Mr. Lucas Babin Date of Service: 05/11/2022 [22-40306] (RLL) [Entered: 05/11/2022 02:42 PM] |
| OPPOSED MOTION filed by Petitioner Mr. Lucas Babin to stay district court proceedings [9844997-2] Ruling is requested by: 05/12/2022. Date of service: 05/11/2022 [22-40306] (RLL) [Entered: 05/11/2022 02:54 PM] |
| ORIGINAL PROCEEDING CASE docketed. [22-40306] (RLL) [Entered: 05/11/2022 02:28 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.
| Search for this case: Lucas BabinIn re: Lucas Babin | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Petitioner: In re: Lucas Babin | |
| Represented By: | Christopher Lee Lindsey |
| 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 ] |
| Respondent: Netflix, Incorporated | |
| Represented By: | Joshua J. Bennett |
| Represented By: | David McDonald Prichard |
| 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.
