Maisonet et al v. United States of America
| JUAN RAMON MAISONET and JOSE RODRIGUEZ |
| UNITED STATES OF AMERICA and Unites States of America |
| 8:2022cv01856 |
| August 12, 2022 |
| US District Court for the Middle District of Florida |
| James S Moody |
| Amanda Arnold Sansone |
| Motor Vehicle |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 2671 Federal Tort Claims Act |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on October 5, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 8 SUMMONS issued as to Unites States of America. (SET) |
| Filing 7 NOTICE by Juan Ramon Maisonet, Jose Rodriguez of Pendency of Other Actions (Lazaro, Paul) |
| Filing 6 CERTIFICATE of interested persons and corporate disclosure statement by Juan Ramon Maisonet, Jose Rodriguez identifying Corporate Parent Morgan & Morgan PA for Jose Rodriguez, Juan Ramon Maisonet. (Lazaro, Paul) |
| Filing 5 NOTICE to counsel Paul Lazaro of filing fee deficiency. Counsel must pay $402 filing fee using the pay fee event or file a Motion to Proceed In Forma Pauperis (Signed by Deputy Clerk). (SET) |
| Filing 4 NOTICE of Local Rule 1.07(c), Local Rule 3.02(a)(2), and Local Rule 3.03. -Local Rule 1.07(c) requires lead counsel to promptly file a Notice of a Related Action that identifies and describes any related action pending in the Middle District or elsewhere. -Local Rule 3.02(a)(2) requires the parties in every civil proceeding, except those described in subsection (d), to file a case management report (CMR) using the uniform form at www.flmd.uscourts.gov. The CMR must be filed (1) within forty days after any defendant appears in an action originating in this court, (2) within forty days after the docketing of an action removed or transferred to this court, or (3) within seventy days after service on the United States attorney in an action against the United States, its agencies or employees. Judges may have a special CMR form for certain types of cases. These forms can be found at www.flmd.uscourts.gov under the Forms tab for each judge. -Local Rule 3.03 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. (SMB) |
| Filing 3 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. (SMB) |
| Filing 2 NEW CASE ASSIGNED to Judge James S. Moody, Jr and Magistrate Judge Amanda Arnold Sansone. New case number: 8:22-cv-1856-JSM-AAS. (SJB) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT against United States of America with Jury Demand (Filing fee $402 receipt number AFLMDC-19880897) filed by Juan Ramon Maisonet, Jose Rodriguez. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet, #2 Proposed Summons)(Lazaro, Paul) Modified text on 8/16/2022 (SET). Modified on 8/17/2022 to add filing fee receipt number (NAS). |
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.
