Foote v. Daino et al
| Randy Foote |
| Officer Christopher Daino, New Castle County and Colonel Joseph S. Bloch |
| 1:2024cv01061 |
| September 23, 2024 |
| U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware |
| Jennifer L Hall |
| Civil Rights: Other |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1441 Petition for Removal |
| 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 |
|---|
| CORRECTING ENTRY: The docket text of D.I. #10 has been modified to reflect the correct title of the document. Counsel is advised to use the stipulation event code when filing a document that is identified as a stipulation and not the motion event code. (ceg) |
SO ORDERED, re #10 Stipulation and Order for Extension of Time to Respond to Defendants' Motion to Dismiss for Insufficiency of Service of Process. (*Reset Briefing Schedule re #7 Motion to Dismiss for Insufficiency of Service of Process: Answering Brief due 12/10/2024). Ordered by Judge Jennifer L. Hall on 11/8/2024. (ceg)
|
| Filing 10 STIPULATION and [Proposed] Order for Extension of Time to Respond to Defendants' Motion to Dismiss for Insufficiency of Service of Process (D.I. #7 ) - filed by Randy Foote. (Johnson, Christofer) Modified on 11/8/2024 (ceg). |
|
Filing 9
ORAL ORDER: Plaintiff's response to Defendants' Motion to Dismiss for Insufficiency of Service of Process (D.I. #7 ) was due by November 6, 2024, and to date none has been filed. Failure to file a response may result in the motion being granted as unopposed. Ordered by Judge Jennifer L. Hall on 11/7/2024. (ceg) Modified on 11/7/2024 (ceg).
|
| Filing 8 Joint STATUS REPORT by Randy Foote. (Johnson, Christofer) |
| Filing 7 MOTION to Dismiss for Insufficiency of Service of Process - filed by Joseph S. Bloch, Christopher Daino. (Attachments: #1 Text of Proposed Order Proposed Order, #2 Certificate of Service)(Episcopo, Helene) |
|
Filing 6
ORAL ORDER: IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the parties shall file a joint status report on or before October 23, 2024 to comply with Delaware Local Rule 81.2. Ordered by Judge Jennifer L. Hall on 10/16/2024. (twk)
|
|
SO ORDERED, re #5 Stipulation and Order to Extend Time to Respond to Defendant's Motion to Dismiss to 11/29/2024. (*Reset Briefing Schedule re #3 Motion to Dismiss: Answering Brief due 11/29/2024). Ordered by Judge Jennifer L. Hall on 10/16/2024. (ceg)
|
| Filing 5 First STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME To Respond to Defendant's Opening Brief/Motion to Dismiss to 11/29/2024 - filed by Randy Foote. (Johnson, Christofer) |
| Filing 4 OPENING BRIEF in Support re #3 MOTION to Dismiss filed by New Castle County.Answering Brief/Response due date per Local Rules is 10/15/2024. (Attachments: #1 Certificate of Service)(Episcopo, Helene) |
| Filing 3 MOTION to Dismiss - filed by New Castle County. (Attachments: #1 Proposed Order, #2 Certificate of Service)(Episcopo, Helene) |
| Case Assigned to Judge Jennifer L. Hall. Please include the initials of the Judge (JLH) after the case number on all documents filed. (rjb) |
| Filing 2 Notice, Consent and Referral forms re: U.S. Magistrate Judge jurisdiction. (cdd) |
| Filing 1 NOTICE OF REMOVAL and copies of documents from DE Superior Court, Case Number N24C-05-153 TBA (Filing fee $405, receipt number ADEDC-4504575)- filed by New Castle County. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A, #2 Exhibit B, #3 Exhibit C, #4 Exhibit D, #5 Civil Cover Sheet, #6 Certificate of Service)(cdd) |
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 Delaware 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.
