Hirning v. D.G.S. Partners, LLC
| Jacob Hirning |
| D.G.S. Partners, LLC |
| 1:2026cv01764 |
| April 25, 2026 |
| U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado |
| Scott T Varholak |
| Civil Rights: Americans with Disabilities - Other |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1331 Federal Question: Other Civil Rights |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on June 22, 2026. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 9 Proposed Scheduling Order by Plaintiff Jacob Hirning. (Schapiro, Douglas) |
Filing 8
ORDER OF REFERENCE. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 636(c), Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 73, Local Civil Rules 40.1(c)(6) and 72.2, and #5 Election Concerning Consent/Non-Consent to United States Magistrate Judge Jurisdiction, this action is REFERRED for final disposition to Magistrate Judge Scott T. Varholak, who will conduct any and all further proceedings and order the entry of judgment in the case. SO ORDERED by Chief Judge Daniel D. Domenico on 06/10/2026. Text Only Entry. (agryan)
|
|
Filing 7
ORDER granting #6 Unopposed Motion for Extension of Time to Respond to Complaint. Defendant's deadline to answer or otherwise respond to the Complaint is EXTENDED to July 14, 2026. SO ORDERED, by Magistrate Judge Scott T. Varholak on 6/10/2026. Text Only Entry(stvlc7, )
|
| Filing 6 Unopposed MOTION for Extension of Time to File Answer or Otherwise Respond re #1 Complaint, by Defendant D.G.S. Partners, LLC. (Attachments: #1 Proposed Order (PDF Only))(Wilkening, Murray) |
| Filing 5 CONSENT to Jurisdiction of Magistrate Judge by Plaintiff Jacob Hirning All parties consent.. (Schapiro, Douglas) |
|
Filing 4
ORDER Setting Deadline for Filing Election Concerning Consent/Non-Consent to Magistrate Jurisdiction Form and Setting Scheduling Conference by Magistrate Judge Scott T. Varholak on 4/28/2026. Consent Form due by 6/16/2026. Proposed Scheduling Order due 6/23/2026. Scheduling Conference set for 6/30/2026 10:00 AM in Courtroom A 402 before Magistrate Judge Scott T. Varholak. (sphil, )
|
| Filing 3 SUMMONS issued by Clerk. (Attachments: #1 Magistrate Judge Consent Form) (agarc, ) |
| Filing 2 Case assigned to Magistrate Judge Scott T. Varholak. Text Only Entry. (agarc, ) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT against D.G.S. Partners, LLC (Filing fee $ 405,Receipt Number ACODC-10972059)Attorney Douglas S. Schapiro added to party Jacob Hirning(pty:pla), filed by Jacob Hirning. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit Receipt, #2 Exhibit Selfie, #3 Civil Cover Sheet, #4 Summons)(Schapiro, Douglas) |
Access additional case information on PACER
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the U.S. 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
| Search for this case: Hirning v. D.G.S. Partners, LLC | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Plaintiff: Jacob Hirning | |
| Represented By: | Douglas S. Schapiro |
| 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 | [ Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Defendant: D.G.S. Partners, LLC | |
| Represented By: | Murray S. Wilkening |
| 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 | [ 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.
