Rothschild v. Pfizer Corporation et al
| Mayer Amschel Rothschild |
| Pfizer Corporation, Dr. Ealon Joelson and Palo Alto Medical Foundation |
| 2:2024cv00301 |
| April 4, 2024 |
| US District Court for the Middle District of Florida |
| Sheri Polster Chappell |
| Kyle C Dudek |
| Personal Injury: Health Care/Pharmaceutical Personal Injury Product Liability |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1332 Diversity-Medical Malpractice |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on April 12, 2024. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 4
ORDER granting #2 Motion to Proceed In Forma Pauperis. The Court stays the service-of-process provision in 28 U.S.C. 1915(d) and service-of-process period in Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(m) until further order; and Plaintiff must file an amended complaint that complies with this Order by May 12, 2024. Failure to do so will result in a recommendation that this case be dismissed. Signed by Magistrate Judge Kyle C. Dudek on 4/12/2024. (CGW)
|
| Filing 3 CIVIL Action Order. Signed by All Divisional Judges on 4/9/2024. (CGW) |
| Filing 2 MOTION to Proceed In Forma Pauperis by Mayer Amschel Rothschild. (ABM) Motions referred to Magistrate Judge Kyle C. Dudek. |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT against Ealon Joelson, Palo Alto Medical Foundation, Pfizer Corporation filed by Mayer Amschel Rothschild. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet)(ABM) |
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 Florida Middle 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.
