Domino Foods, Inc. v. CSX Transportation, Inc. et al
Plaintiff: Domino Foods, Inc.
Defendant: Norfolk Southern Railway Co., Union Pacific Railroad Company, BNSF Railway Co. and CSX Transportation, Inc.
Case Number: 9:2020cv80285
Filed: February 25, 2020
Court: US District Court for the Southern District of Florida
Presiding Judge: Raag Singhal
Nature of Suit: Anti-Trust
Cause of Action: 15:0001
Jury Demanded By: Plaintiff
Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on March 19, 2020. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
March 19, 2020 Filing 15 ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF RECEIPT. Case transferred from Florida Southern has been opened in District of Columbia as case 1:20-cv-00776, filed 03/19/2020. (jua)
March 19, 2020 SYSTEM ENTRY - Case 9:20-cv-80285 electronically transferred out to District of Columbia. (mc)
March 19, 2020 Civil Case Terminated per DE #14 Conditional Transfer Order. Closing Case. (mc)
March 19, 2020 Filing 14 CONDITIONAL TRANSFER ORDER (CTO-6) transferring case to the District of Columbia re: MDL 2925 for consolidated pretrial proceedings pursuant to 28 USC 1407 and assigned to the Honorable Beryl A. Howell. (Signed by John W. Nichols, Clerk of the Panel). (mc)
March 18, 2020 Opinion or Order Filing 13 PAPERLESS ORDER granting #12 Motion to Stay. This case and the obligations imposed by the Court's Order Requiring Scheduling Report and Certificates of Interested Parties and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(a)(1) and (f) shall be stayed for thirty days. On or before April 17, 2020, Plaintiff shall inform the Court of the status of the transfer of this action to Multidistrict Litigation No. 2925 as ordered by the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation. In re: Rail Freight Fuel Surcharge Antitrust Litigation (No. II), Misc. No. 20-00008 (BAH), Dkt. No. 149. Signed by Judge Raag Singhal on 3/18/2020. (AHS)
March 18, 2020 Filing 12 Unopposed MOTION to Stay Regarding Defendants' Obligation to File an Answer or Other Response, Order Requiring Scheduling Report, and Deadlines Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(a)(1) and (f) by Domino Foods, Inc.. Responses due by 4/1/2020 (Singer, Stuart)
March 11, 2020 Filing 11 Clerks Notice to Filer re #6 Summons Returned Executed. Incorrect Service Date Entered; ERROR - The incorrect service date was entered. The correction was made by the Clerk and filing was re-docketed, see DE#10. It is not necessary to refile this document. (scn)
March 11, 2020 Filing 10 SUMMONS (Affidavit) Returned Executed on #1 Complaint, with a 21 day response/answer filing deadline pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12 by Domino Foods, Inc. CSX Transportation, Inc. served on 2/28/2020, answer due 3/20/2020. See DE#6 for image. (scn)
March 11, 2020 Filing 9 SUMMONS (Affidavit) Returned Executed on #1 Complaint, with a 21 day response/answer filing deadline pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12 by Domino Foods, Inc.. Norfolk Southern Railway Co. served on 3/6/2020, answer due 3/27/2020. (Singer, Stuart)
March 11, 2020 Filing 8 SUMMONS (Affidavit) Returned Executed on #1 Complaint, with a 21 day response/answer filing deadline pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12 by Domino Foods, Inc.. Union Pacific Railroad Company served on 2/27/2020, answer due 3/19/2020. (Singer, Stuart)
March 11, 2020 Filing 7 SUMMONS (Affidavit) Returned Executed on #1 Complaint, with a 21 day response/answer filing deadline pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12 by Domino Foods, Inc.. BNSF Railway Co. served on 2/26/2020, answer due 3/18/2020. (Singer, Stuart)
March 11, 2020 Filing 6 SUMMONS (Affidavit) Returned Executed on #1 Complaint, with a 21 day response/answer filing deadline pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12 by Domino Foods, Inc.. CSX Transportation, Inc. served on 2/26/2020, answer due 3/18/2020. (Singer, Stuart)
March 2, 2020 Opinion or Order Filing 5 ORDER REQUIRING SCHEDULING REPORT AND CERTIFICATES OF INTERESTED PARTIES, Signed by Judge Raag Singhal on 3/2/2020. See attached document for full details. (jao)
March 2, 2020 Filing 4 NOTICE OF COURT PRACTICE.Unless otherwise specified by the Court, every motion, legal memorandum, brief, and otherwise shall: be double-spaced, in justified alignment, in 12-point font, using either Times New Roman or Arial typeface. This Notice does not supplant the requirements and provisions of Local Rule 7.1(c). The Court cautions parties against excessive use of footnotes.Multiple Plaintiffs or Defendants shall file joint motions with co-parties unless there are clear conflicts of position. If conflicts of position exist, parties shall explain the conflicts in their separate motions.Failure to comply with any of these procedures may result in the imposition of appropriate sanctions. Signed by Judge Raag Singhal on 3/2/2020. (eca)
February 25, 2020 Filing 3 Summons Issued as to BNSF Railway Co., CSX Transportation, Inc., Norfolk Southern Railway Co., Union Pacific Railroad Company. (Attachments: #1 Summon(s), #2 Summon(s), #3 Summon(s))(jbs)
February 25, 2020 Filing 2 Clerks Notice of Judge Assignment to Judge Raag Singhal. Pursuant to 28 USC 636(c), the parties are hereby notified that the U.S. Magistrate Judge William Matthewman is available to handle any or all proceedings in this case. If agreed, parties should complete and file the Consent form found on our website. It is not necessary to file a document indicating lack of consent. Pro se (NON-PRISONER) litigants may receive Notices of Electronic Filings (NEFS) via email after filing a Consent by Pro Se Litigant (NON-PRISONER) to Receive Notices of Electronic Filing. The consent form is available under the forms section of our website. (jbs)
February 25, 2020 Filing 1 COMPLAINT against All Defendants. Filing fees $ 400.00 receipt number AFLSDC-12509308, filed by Domino Foods, Inc.. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet, #2 Summon(s) (CSX Transportation, Inc.), #3 Summon(s) (Norfolk Southern Railway Company), #4 Summon(s) (BNSF Railway Company), #5 Summon(s) (Union Pacific Railroad Company))(Singer, Stuart)

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 Southern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Domino Foods, Inc. v. CSX Transportation, Inc. et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Domino Foods, Inc.
Represented By: Stuart Harold Singer
Represented By: James Michael Grippando
Represented By: Carlos Mario Sires
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Norfolk Southern Railway Co.
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Union Pacific Railroad Company
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: BNSF Railway Co.
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: CSX Transportation, Inc.
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]

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.


Why Is My Information Online?