Preuninger v. Clark et al
John Preuninger |
Graham Ivan Clark and Emiliya Clark |
8:2021cv01003 |
April 27, 2021 |
US District Court for the Middle District of Florida |
Virginia M Hernandez Covington |
Anthony E Porcelli |
Personal Property: Other |
28 U.S.C. § 1332 |
Both |
Docket Report
This docket was last retrieved on June 25, 2021. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
Document Text |
---|
Filing 28 MOTION for Clerk's Default against Graham Ivan Clark by John Preuninger. (Gitkin, James) Motions referred to Magistrate Judge Anthony E. Porcelli. |
Filing 27 ENDORSED ORDER granting #25 Motion to Appear Pro Hac Vice; granting #26 Motion to Appear Pro Hac Vice. Attorneys Kristen M. Santillo and R. Zachary Gelber may appear pro hac vice on behalf of Plaintiff. Within twenty-one (21) days of the date of this order, counsel shall comply with the electronic filing requirements and file a notice of compliance with said requirements. Signed by Magistrate Judge Anthony E. Porcelli on 6/24/2021. (JMF) |
Filing 26 Amended MOTION for R. Zachary Gelber to appear pro hac vice by John Preuninger. (Attachments: #1 Text of Proposed Order Order Granting R. Zachary Gelber's Amended Unopposed Motion to Appear Pro Hac Vice)(Gitkin, James) Motions referred to Magistrate Judge Anthony E. Porcelli. |
Filing 25 Amended MOTION for Kristen M. Santillo to appear pro hac vice by John Preuninger. (Attachments: #1 Text of Proposed Order Order Granting Kristen M. Santillo's Amended Unopposed Motion to Appear Pro Hac Vice)(Gitkin, James) Motions referred to Magistrate Judge Anthony E. Porcelli. |
Filing 24 ENDORSED ORDER denying without prejudice #22 Motion to Appear Pro Hac Vice; denying without prejudice #23 Motion to Appear Pro Hac Vice for failure to comply with Local Rule 2.01(c). The motions indicate that the attorneys have "not made more than three (3) separate appearances in any Florida state or federal court within a 365-day period[,]" while the Local Rule requires that counsel list each case in state or federal court in Florida in which the lawyer has initially appeared in the last thirty-six months. Signed by Magistrate Judge Anthony E. Porcelli on 6/24/2021. (JMF) |
Filing 23 Unopposed MOTION for R. Zachary Gelber to appear pro hac vice, Special Admission fee paid, Receipt No. AFLMDC-18401365 for $150 by John Preuninger. (Attachments: #1 Text of Proposed Order Order Granting R. Zachary Gelber's Unopposed Motion to Appear Pro Hac Vice)(Gitkin, James) Motions referred to Magistrate Judge Anthony E. Porcelli. |
Filing 22 Unopposed MOTION for Kristen M. Santillo to appear pro hac vice, Special Admission fee paid, Receipt No. AFLMDC-18401334 for $150 by John Preuninger. (Attachments: #1 Text of Proposed Order Order Granting Kristen M. Santillo's Unopposed Motion to Appear Pro Hac Vice)(Gitkin, James) Motions referred to Magistrate Judge Anthony E. Porcelli. |
Filing 21 ANSWER and affirmative defenses to #1 Complaint with Jury Demand by Emiliya Clark.(Weissman, Joseph) |
Filing 20 CASE MANAGEMENT REPORT. (Gitkin, James) |
Filing 19 ENDORSED ORDER: Defendant Emiliya Clark's unopposed Motion for Extension of Time (Doc. #18) is granted. Emiliya Clark's response to the complaint is now due by June 17, 2021. The Court will be disinclined to further extend this deadline absent good cause. Signed by Judge Virginia M. Hernandez Covington on 6/15/2021. (AR) |
Filing 18 Consent MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply as to #1 Complaint by Emiliya Clark. (Weissman, Joseph) |
Filing 17 ENDORSED ORDER: Defendant Emiliya Clark's unopposed Motion for Extension of Time (Doc. #16) is granted. The parties' case management report is now due by June 16, 2021. Signed by Judge Virginia M. Hernandez Covington on 6/10/2021. (AR) |
Filing 16 MOTION for Extension of Time to File Case Management by Emiliya Clark. (Weissman, Joseph) |
Filing 15 ENDORSED ORDER: Defendant Emiliya Clark's unopposed Motion for Extension of Time (Doc. #12) is granted. Emiliya Clark's response to the complaint is now due by June 14, 2021. Signed by Judge Virginia M. Hernandez Covington on 5/24/2021. (AR) |
Filing 14 NOTICE of a related action per Local Rule 1.07(c) by Emiliya Clark. Related case(s): No (Weissman, Joseph) |
Filing 13 CORPORATE Disclosure Statement by Emiliya Clark. (Weissman, Joseph) |
Filing 12 Consent MOTION for Extension of Time to File Answer re #1 Complaint by Emiliya Clark. (Weissman, Joseph) |
Filing 11 ENDORSED ORDER: Counsel are directed to meet and confer, in person or by telephone, and by June 9, 2021, file a completed Case Management Report. The Court believes that six to eight months is a sufficient period of time to conduct discovery in the vast majority of cases. If the parties believe that more than eight months will be needed to complete discovery, the parties should provide the Court with a detailed explanation as to why additional time is needed and a timeline for the discovery that is planned. After the Case Management Report is filed, the Court will determine whether a Case Management Hearing is necessary before entry of a Case Management and Scheduling Order. Signed by Judge Virginia M. Hernandez Covington on 5/6/2021. (AR) |
Filing 10 NOTICE informing the parties that they may consent to the jurisdiction of a United States magistrate judge by filing Form AO 85 Notice, Consent, and Reference of a Civil Action to a Magistrate Judge using the event Consent to Jurisdiction of US Magistrate Judge. (Signed by Deputy Clerk). (TWL) |
Filing 9 RETURN of service executed on 05/05/2021 by John Preuninger as to Graham Ivan Clark. (Gitkin, James) |
Filing 8 NOTICE of Local Rule 3.03, which requires each party to file a disclosure statement with the first appearance that identifies (1) each person that has or might have an interest in the outcome, (2) each entity with publicly traded shares or debt potentially affected by the outcome, (3) each additional entity likely to actively participate, and (4) each person arguably eligible for restitution. The disclosure statement must include this certification - I certify that, except as disclosed, I am unaware of an actual or potential conflict of interest affecting the district judge or the magistrate judge in this action, and I will immediately notify the judge in writing within fourteen days after I know of a conflict. (Signed by Deputy Clerk). (TWL) |
Filing 7 NOTICE of Local Rule 1.07(c), which requires lead counsel to promptly file a Notice of a Related Action that identifies and describes any related action pending in the Middle District. (Signed by Deputy Clerk). (TWL) |
Filing 6 NOTICE informing the parties that they may consent to the jurisdiction of a United States magistrate judge by filing Form AO 85 Notice, Consent, and Reference of a Civil Action to a Magistrate Judge using the event Consent to Jurisdiction of US Magistrate Judge. (Signed by Deputy Clerk). (TWL) |
Filing 5 RETURN of service executed on 05/01/2021 by John Preuninger as to Emiliya Clark. (Gitkin, James) |
Filing 4 CORPORATE Disclosure Statement by John Preuninger. (Gitkin, James) |
Filing 3 SUMMONS issued as to Emiliya Clark, Graham Ivan Clark. (LNR) |
Filing 2 NEW CASE ASSIGNED to Judge Virginia M. Hernandez Covington and Magistrate Judge Anthony E. Porcelli. New case number: 8:21-cv-01003-VMC-AEP. (SJB) |
Filing 1 COMPLAINT against Emiliya Clark, Graham Ivan Clark with Jury Demand (Filing fee $ 402 receipt number AFLMDC-18186191) filed by John Preuninger. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet, #2 Proposed Summons, #3 Proposed Summons, #4 Rule 7.1 and Local Rule 3.03 Disclosure Statement)(Gitkin, James) |
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.