Winthrop Intelligence LLC et al v. Harvard Cider Company LLC et al
Plaintiff: Robert Scott Brooks and Winthrop Intelligence LLC
Defendant: Mark Finnegan, Harvard Cider Company LLC and Chase Brooks
Case Number: 1:2018cv01910
Filed: July 27, 2018
Court: US District Court for the District of Colorado
Office: Denver Office
County: Denver
Presiding Judge: S Kato Crews
Referring Judge: Marcia S Krieger
Nature of Suit: Contract: Other
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1330 Breach of Contract
Jury Demanded By: None
Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on August 20, 2018. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
August 20, 2018 Filing 14 JUDGMENT in favor of defendants Harvard Cider Company LLC, Chase Brooks, Mark Finnegan against plaintiffs Winthrop Intelligence LLC, Robert Scott Brooks re: #13 Order Dismissing Case by Clerk on 8/20/18. (pglov)
August 20, 2018 Opinion or Order Filing 13 OPINION AND ORDER DISMISSING ACTION. by Chief Judge Marcia S. Krieger on 8/20/18. (pglov)
August 6, 2018 Opinion or Order Filing 12 REASSIGNING MAGISTRATE JUDGE. This action is reassigned to Magistrate Judge S. Kato Crews, upon his appointment. All future pleadings should reference Magistrate Judge Crews at the end of the civil action number (such as 15-cv-00001-PAB-SKC). Unless otherwise ordered, the dates and times for all previously scheduled matters will be maintained and will now be handled by Magistrate Judge Crews in Courtroom C-204. His chambers are located in Room C-253 of the Byron G. Rogers Courthouse. His telephone number is 303-335-2117. (Text only entry) (dkals, )
August 2, 2018 Filing 11 WAIVER OF SERVICE Returned Executed by Winthrop Intelligence LLC. Chase Brooks waiver sent on 7/31/2018, answer due 10/1/2018; Mark Finnegan waiver sent on 7/31/2018, answer due 10/1/2018; Harvard Cider Company LLC waiver sent on 7/31/2018, answer due 10/1/2018. (Attachments: #1 Summons, #2 Summons)(Davis, Michael)
August 2, 2018 Opinion or Order Filing 10 ORDER REGARDING CUSTODY OF EXHIBITS AND DEPOSITIONS USED IN EVIDENTIARY HEARINGS AND TRIALS: Any exhibits and depositions used during evidentiary hearings or trials, counsel for the parties shall retrieve the originals of such exhibits and depositions from the Court following the evidentiary hearing or trial, and shall retain same for 60 days beyond the later of the time to appeal or conclusion of any appellate proceedings. The Court will retain its copy of the exhibits for the same time period after which the documents will be destroyed. by Chief Judge Marcia S. Krieger on 8/2/18. Text Only Entry (pglov)
August 1, 2018 Opinion or Order Filing 9 MINUTE ORDER SETTING SCHEDULING CONFERENCE by Magistrate Judge Michael E. Hegarty on 08/01/2018. Scheduling Conference set for 10/10/2018 10:30 AM in Courtroom A 501 before Magistrate Judge Michael E. Hegarty. The Plaintiffs shall notify all parties who have not entered an appearance of the date and time of the Scheduling Conference. (mdave, )
July 31, 2018 Filing 8 SUMMONSES issued by Clerk. (dkals, )
July 31, 2018 Filing 7 SUMMONS REQUEST as to Harvard Cider Company LLC, Chase Brooks, Mark Finnegan re #6 Amended Complaint, #1 Complaint, by Plaintiff Winthrop Intelligence LLC. (Attachments: #1 Summons Chase Brooks, #2 Summons Mark Finnegan)(Davis, Michael)
July 30, 2018 Filing 6 AMENDED COMPLAINT against Chase Brooks, Mark Finnegan, Harvard Cider Company LLC, filed by Winthrop Intelligence LLC.(Davis, Michael)
July 30, 2018 Opinion or Order Filing 5 ORDER REFERRING CASE to Magistrate Judge Michael E. Hegarty: IT IS ORDERED that pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 636(b)(1)(A) and (B) and FED. R. CIV. P. 72(a) and (b), this matter is referred to the assigned United States Magistrate Judge to:(1)Convene a scheduling conference under FED. R. CIV. P. 16(b), enter a Scheduling Order meeting the requirements of D.C.COLO.LCivR 16.2, enter such orders as appropriate to enforce the Scheduling Order, and resolve discovery matters;(2)ADR: Court sponsored alternative dispute resolution is governed by D.C.COLO.LCivR 16.6. Early Neutral Evaluation is approved. On the informal request of the magistrate judge or on the request of the parties by motion, the Court may direct the parties to engage in a settlement conference conducted by the magistrate judge if the parties have engaged in an Early Neutral Evaluation and are unable to afford or otherwise attain private settlement assistance;(3)Hear and determine referred matters in accordance with 28 U.S.C. 636(b)(1)(A) and (B). by Chief Judge Marcia S. Krieger on 7/30/18. Text Only Entry (msksec, )
July 27, 2018 Opinion or Order Filing 4 ORDER: The Complaint's allegations supporting federal subject-matter jurisdiction are facially defecitve. The Plaintiffs rely on diversity of citizenship, but fail to adequately identify the citizenship of the Plaintiff and Defendant limited liability corporations. The citizenship of such entities is deteremined by the citizenship of each of its respective members. Siloam Springs Hotel, LLC v. Century Sur. Co., 781 F.3d 1233 (10th Cir. 2015). Thus, it is necessary for the Complaint to identify each member of each entity, as well as the citizenship of those members. Accordingly, within 14 days of this Order, the Plaintiffs shall file an Amended Complaint curing the defect or otherwise show cause why this action should not be dismissed for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction. By Chief Judge Marcia S. Krieger on 7/27/18. Text Only Entry (msklc2, )
July 27, 2018 Filing 3 Magistrate Judge consent form issued pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 636(c). (dbera, )
July 27, 2018 Filing 2 Case assigned to Chief Judge Marcia S. Krieger and drawn to Magistrate Judge Michael E. Hegarty. Text Only Entry (dbera, )
July 27, 2018 Filing 1 COMPLAINT against Chase Brooks, Mark Finnegan, Harvard Cider Company LLC (Filing fee $ 400,Receipt Number 1082-6218894)Attorney Michael J. Davis added to party Winthrop Intelligence LLC(pty:pla), filed by Winthrop Intelligence LLC. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet)(Davis, Michael)

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 Colorado District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Winthrop Intelligence LLC et al v. Harvard Cider Company LLC et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Mark Finnegan
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: Harvard Cider Company LLC
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: Chase Brooks
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: Robert Scott Brooks
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: Winthrop Intelligence LLC
Represented By: Michael J. Davis
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?