Cintas Corporation No. 2 v. CI Rotomolding USA, Inc.
| Cintas Corporation No. 2 |
| CI Rotomolding USA, Inc. |
| 1:2018cv04191 |
| September 4, 2018 |
| US District Court for the Northern District of Georgia |
| Orinda D Evans |
| Contract: Other |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1441 |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on October 15, 2018. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 7
ORDER GRANTING the Defendant's #4 Motion to Compel Arbitration. The Plaintiff is hereby DIRECTED to proceed to arbitration in accordance with the terms of the Agreement. On or before 12/15/2018, the parties shall file a Joint Status Report indicating the status of the arbitration proceedings and the expected date those proceedings will be concluded. The Court further ORDERS that this action is STAYED pending the final outcome of any arbitration proceedings. The Clerk of Court is instructed to ADMINISTRATIVELY CLOSE this case for statistical purposes only. Signed by Judge Orinda D. Evans on 10/15/2018. (sap)
|
| Civil Case Administratively Closed. (sap) |
| Submission of #4 MOTION to Compel Arbitration to District Judge Orinda D. Evans. (sap) |
| Filing 6 Notice for Leave of Absence for the following date(s): October 22-23, 2018 and November 29-30, 2018 by James William Cobb. (Cobb, James) |
| Filing 5 ANSWER to #1 NOTICE OF REMOVAL by CI Rotomolding USA, Inc.. Discovery ends on 2/8/2019.(Cobb, James) Please visit our website at http://www.gand.uscourts.gov to obtain Pretrial Instructions. |
| Filing 4 MOTION to Compel Arbitration with Brief In Support by CI Rotomolding USA, Inc.. (Attachments: #1 Text of Proposed Order)(Cobb, James) |
| Submission of #1 Notice of Removal for Review, to District Judge Orinda D. Evans. (eop) |
| Filing 3 NOTICE of Appearance by James William Cobb on behalf of CI Rotomolding USA, Inc. (eop) |
| Filing 2 Certificate of Interested Persons by CI Rotomolding USA, Inc.. (eop) |
| Filing 1 NOTICE OF REMOVAL with COMPLAINT filed by CI Rotomolding USA, Inc.. (Filing fee $ 400.00 receipt number 113E-8121968) (Attachments: #1 Exhibit -A - State Court Pleadings, #2 Exhibit -B - Notice of Filing, #3 Exhibit -C - Georgia Registration, #4 Civil Cover Sheet)(eop) Please visit our website at http://www.gand.uscourts.gov/commonly-used-forms to obtain Pretrial Instructions and Pretrial Associated Forms which includes the Consent To Proceed Before U.S. Magistrate form. |
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 Georgia Northern 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
| Search for this case: Cintas Corporation No. 2 v. CI Rotomolding USA, Inc. | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Plaintiff: Cintas Corporation No. 2 | |
| Represented By: | Brandon David Wagner |
| 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: CI Rotomolding USA, Inc. | |
| Represented By: | James William Cobb |
| Represented By: | Ashley Christina Brown |
| 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.
