Pennell et al v. Parsons Corporation
| Berton Pennell and Samuel Pennell-Potestio |
| Parsons Corporation |
| 1:2020cv03769 |
| December 23, 2020 |
| US District Court for the District of Colorado |
| Raymond P Moore |
| Kathleen M Tafoya |
| Motor Vehicle |
| 28 U.S.C. § 1332 |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on February 19, 2021. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 16
ORDER: This matter is before the Court on Plaintiff's motion to file a second amended complaint #15 . After reviewing the motion, the Court finds Plaintiff fails to show compliance with D.C.COLO.LCivR 7.1(a) (conferral) and fails to comply with D.C.COLO.LCivR 15.1. Accordingly, the motion #15 is DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE with leave to refile by Wednesday, February 24, 2021. In addition, Plaintiff requests the Court to "dismiss" the order to show cause but the court record shows the order to show cause 7 was discharged on December 28, 2020 (ECF No. 9). SO ORDERED by Judge Raymond P. Moore on 2/19/2021. (Text Only Entry)(rmsec )
|
| Filing 15 MOTION for Leave to File Second Amended Complaint by Plaintiffs Berton Pennell, Samuel Pennell-Potestio. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit Exhibit 1 - Second Amended Complaint)(Gorman, Joseph) |
| Filing 14 STIPULATION for Extension of Time to Answer or Respond to the Complaint by Defendant Parsons Corporation.. (Norton, Tiffaney) |
| Filing 13 SUMMONS Returned Executed by All Plaintiffs. Parsons Corporation served on 1/20/2021, answer due 2/10/2021. (Gorman, Joseph) |
|
Filing 12
ORDER Setting Initial Case Deadlines by Magistrate Judge Kathleen M. Tafoya on 12/29/2020. Proposed Scheduling Order due 2/24/2021 (evaug )
|
| Filing 11 AMENDED COMPLAINT and Jury Demand against Parsons Corporation, filed by Berton Pennell, Samuel Pennell-Potestio.(Gorman, Joseph) |
| Filing 10 NOTICE of Filing Amended Pleading by Plaintiffs Berton Pennell, Samuel Pennell-Potestio (Attachments: #1 Exhibit Exhibit 1 - Amended Complaint (redlined))(Gorman, Joseph) |
|
Filing 9
MINUTE ORDER: This matter is before the Court on Plaintiffs' response #8 to the Order to Show Cause (ECF No. 7). The response includes a request for leave to amend Plaintiffs' complaint to include allegations that Defendant Parsons' principal place of business is located in the State of Virginia and, therefore, that diversity jurisdiction exists. Upon review of the record, the Court ORDERS as follows: (1) because Plaintiffs may amend as a matter of course, see Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a), the amended complaint is accepted for filing; (2) by December 29, 2020, Plaintiffs shall file the amended complaint [8-1] as a separate docket entry and file a "redlined" copy of the amended complaint showing all changes in accordance with D.C.COLO.LCivR 15.1(a); and (3) that the Order to Show Cause (ECF No. 7) is hereby DISCHARGED. SO ORDERED by Judge Raymond P. Moore on 12/28/2020. (Text Only Entry) (rmsec )
|
| Filing 8 RESPONSE to 7 Minute Order,,,,,, by Plaintiffs Berton Pennell, Samuel Pennell-Potestio. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit Exhibit 1 - Amended Complaint)(Gorman, Joseph) |
|
Filing 7
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE. This matter is before the Court sua sponte after reviewing the Complaint and finding an issue is raised as to whether subject matter jurisdiction has been plausibly alleged. See Amazon, Inc. v. Dirt Camp, Inc., 273 F.3d 1271, 1276 (10th Cir. 2001) (A federal court has an independent obligation to examine its own jurisdiction at every stage of the proceeding.). Plaintiffs allege diversity jurisdiction exists pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1332, which requires complete diversity of citizenship between the parties. Grynberg v. Kinder Morgan Energy Partners, L.P., 805 F.3d 901, 905 (10th Cir. 2015). Here, to show diversity jurisdiction, Plaintiffs allege that Defendant Parsons Corporation is incorporated in the State of Delaware. A corporation, however, is "deemed to be a citizen of every State and foreign state by which it has been incorporated and of the State or foreign state where it has its principal place of business." 28 U.S.C. 1332(c)(1) (emphasis added). But, Plaintiffs fail to allege the principal place of business of Defendant Parsons and show that it is not a citizen of the State of Colorado. As such, diversity subject matter jurisdiction has not been shown. Accordingly, it is ORDERED that on or before January 5, 2021, Plaintiffs shall SHOW CAUSE why this action should not be dismissed without prejudice for lack of subject jurisdiction. SO ORDERED by Judge Raymond P. Moore on 12/28/2020. (Text Only Entry) (rmsec )
|
|
Filing 6
MINUTE ORDER: With the assignment of this matter, the parties are advised that throughout this case they are expected to be familiar and comply with not only the Local Rules of this District, but also Judge Raymond P. Moore's Civil Practice Standards, which may be found at: http://www.cod.uscourts.gov/JudicialOfficers/ActiveArticleIIIJudges/HonRaymondPMoore.aspx. SO ORDERED by Judge Raymond P. Moore on 12/28/2020. (Text Only Entry) (rmsec )
|
|
Filing 5
ORDER REFERRING CASE to Magistrate Judge Kathleen M. Tafoya. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 636(b)(1)(A) and (B) and Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(a) and (b), this case is referred to the assigned United States Magistrate Judge to (1) convene a scheduling conference under Fed. R. Civ. P. 16(b) and enter a scheduling order meeting the requirements of D.C.COLO.LCivR 16.2, (2) conduct such status conferences and issue such orders necessary for compliance with the scheduling order, including amendments or modifications of the scheduling order upon a showing of good cause, (3) hear and determine pretrial matters, including discovery and other non-dispositive motions, (4) conduct a pretrial conference and enter a pretrial order, and (5) conduct hearings, including evidentiary hearings, and submit proposed findings of fact and recommendations for rulings on dispositive motions. Court sponsored alternative dispute resolution is governed by D.C.COLO.LCivR 16.6. On the recommendation or informal request of the magistrate judge or on the request of the parties by motion, this court may direct the parties to engage in an early neutral evaluation, a settlement conference, or another alternative dispute resolution proceeding. By Judge Raymond P. Moore on 12/28/2020. (Text Only Entry) (rmsec )
|
| Filing 4 SUMMONS issued by Clerk. (Attachments: #1 Magistrate Judge Consent Form) (jsalz, ) |
| Filing 3 Case assigned to Judge Raymond P. Moore and drawn to Magistrate Judge Kathleen M. Tafoya. Text Only Entry. (jsalz, ) |
| Filing 2 SUMMONS REQUEST as to Parsons Corporation re #1 Complaint, by Plaintiffs Berton Pennell, Samuel Pennell-Potestio. (Gorman, Joseph) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT and Jury Demand against Parsons Corporation (Filing fee $ 402,Receipt Number 1082-7643905)Attorney Joseph M. Gorman added to party Berton Pennell(pty:pla), Attorney Joseph M. Gorman added to party Samuel Pennell-Potestio(pty:pet), filed by Berton Pennell, Samuel Pennell-Potestio.(Gorman, Joseph) |
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 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.
