Eisenberg et al v. Oak View Group, LLC
| Chloe Eisenberg, Justin Bowles, Samantha Wright and Jack Krabbe |
| Oak View Group, LLC |
| 1:2026cv02742 |
| June 18, 2026 |
| U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado |
| Cyrus Y Chung |
| Charlotte N Sweeney |
| Personal Property: Other |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1332 Diversity-Property Damage |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on August 7, 2026. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 12
ORDER granting #11 Unopposed Motion for Extension of Time to File Consolidated Complaint. Plaintiffs shall file their consolidated complaint on or before September 7, 2026. By Judge Charlotte N. Sweeney on 8/7/26. Text Only Entry(jdyne, )
|
| Filing 11 Unopposed MOTION for Extension of Time to File Consolidated Complaint by Plaintiffs Justin Bowles, Chloe Eisenberg, Consol Plaintiffs Jack Krabbe, Samantha Wright. (Attachments: #1 Proposed Order (PDF Only) Proposed Order)(Federman, William) |
|
Filing 10
ORDER by Judge Charlotte N. Sweeney on 7/7/2026, re: #8 Motion to Consolidate Cases is GRANTED. Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 42(a), the Court hereby consolidates Chloe Eisenberg and Justin Bowles v. Oak View Gorup, LLC, No. 1:26-cv-02742, Samantha Wright v. Oak View Group, LLC, No. 1:26-cv-02787-CNS-CYC, and Jack Krabbe v. Oak View Group, LLC, No. 1:26-cv-02802-CNS, under the docket number of this first-filed case: 1:26-cv-02742-CNS-CYC (the lead case), and under the new title: "In re Oak View Group, LLC Data Breach Litigation". All future filings shall be made in the lead case. The consolidated cases,1:26-cv-02787-CNS-CYC and 1:26-cv-02802-CNS, shall be administratively closed. For all non-e-filer pro se parties, a copy of this document has been sent via U.S. Mail to the mailing address of record.(sphil, )
|
| Filing 9 BRIEF in Support of #8 Unopposed MOTION to Consolidate Cases Appoint Interim Class Counsel, and Set Deadlines for Filing of Consolidated Complaint filed by Plaintiffs Justin Bowles, Chloe Eisenberg, Consol Plaintiffs Jack Krabbe, Samantha Wright. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit Siri & Glimstad Firm Resume, #2 Exhibit Federman & Sherwood Firm Resume, #3 Exhibit Stranch, Jennings & Garvey Firm Resume)(Federman, William) |
| Filing 8 Unopposed MOTION to Consolidate Cases Appoint Interim Class Counsel, and Set Deadlines for Filing of Consolidated Complaint by Plaintiffs Justin Bowles, Chloe Eisenberg, Consol Plaintiffs Samantha Wright, Jack Krabbe. (Federman, William) |
| Filing 7 SUMMONS Returned Executed by Chloe Eisenberg, Justin Bowles. Oak View Group, LLC served on 6/29/2026, answer due 7/20/2026. (Bean, Tyler) |
|
Filing 6
MINUTE ORDER: Pursuant to the Order of Reference, this Court will hold the Fed. R. Civ. P. 16(b) Scheduling Conference on September 1, 2026 at 10:15 a.m., in Courtroom C-201, on the second floor of the Byron G. Rogers United States Courthouse located at 1929 Stout Street, Denver, Colorado. It is ORDERED that Plaintiff shall notify all Parties who have not entered an appearance of the date and time of the scheduling conference. The Parties shall file the proposed Scheduling Order with the Clerk's Office, and in accordance with District of Colorado Electronic Case Filing ("ECF") Procedures, no later than seven days prior to the scheduling conference. The proposed Scheduling Order is also to be submitted in Word format by email to Magistrate Judge Chung at [email protected]. Entered by Magistrate Judge Cyrus Y. Chung on 06/24/2026. (agryan)
|
|
Filing 5
ORDER REFERRING CASE to Magistrate Judge Cyrus Y. Chung for non-dispositive matters. 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 Local Civ. R. 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) pursuant to Local Civ. R. 16.6 and at the discretion of the Magistrate Judge, convene such early neutral evaluation and/or settlement conferences and direct related procedures as may facilitate resolution of this case without the necessity of a motion or prior authorization of the undersigned. Additionally, the parties are ordered to familiarize themselves with the Uniform Civil Practice Standards of both judicial officers assigned to this case which can be found #here. By Judge Charlotte N. Sweeney on 6/24/26. Text Only Entry (jdyne, )
|
| Filing 4 MEMORANDUM. Case reassigned to Judge Charlotte N. Sweeney for all further proceedings. All future pleadings should be designated as 26-cv-02742-CNS. (jrobe, ) |
| Filing 3 SUMMONS issued by Clerk. (Attachments: #1 Magistrate Judge Consent Form) (jberr, ) |
| Filing 2 Case assigned to Judge William J. Martinez and drawn to Magistrate Judge Cyrus Y. Chung. Text Only Entry. (jberr, ) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT against Oak View Group, LLC (Filing fee $ 405,Receipt Number ACODC-11089071)Attorney Tyler J. Bean added to party Justin Bowles(pty:pla), Attorney Tyler J. Bean added to party Chloe Eisenberg(pty:pla), filed by Chloe Eisenberg, Justin Bowles. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet Civil Cover Sheet, #2 Summons Request for Issuance of Summons)(Bean, Tyler) |
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
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.
