Architecture Design West, P.C. v. Raass Brothers, Inc.
Plaintiff: Architecture Design West, P.C.
Defendant: Raass Brothers, Inc. and Arch Insurance Company
Case Number: 1:2019cv00512
Filed: September 25, 2019
Court: US District Court for the District of Hawaii
Presiding Judge: J MICHAEL SEABRIGHT
Referring Judge: ROM TRADER
Nature of Suit: Miller Act
Cause of Action: 40 U.S.C. ยง 270
Jury Demanded By: None
Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on November 13, 2019. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
November 13, 2019 Filing 10 EO: Pursuant to the parties' request, the Rule 16 Scheduling Conference set for 11/25/19 @ 9:00 AM is continued to 1/8/2020 @ 9:00 AM before MAGISTRATE JUDGE ROM TRADER. Rule 16 Scheduling Conference statements to be filed by 1/2/20. (MAGISTRATE JUDGE ROM TRADER)(tbf, )
November 13, 2019 Filing 9 Letter addressed to Magistrate Judge Rom Trader from Scott I. Batterman, Esq., dated November 11, 2019, Re: Request of the parties to continue the Scheduling Conference currently set for November 25, 2019. (emt, )
September 25, 2019 Filing 8 Summons Issued as to Defendants Arch Insurance Company and Raass Brothers, Inc. (jo)
September 25, 2019 Filing 7 CIVIL Waiver of Service Packet ~ Notice to Parties Regarding Service Pursuant to Rule 4 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (Attachments: #1 Notice of a Lawsuit and Request to Waive Service of Summons, #2 Waiver of the Service of Summons) (jo)
September 25, 2019 Opinion or Order Filing 6 Order Setting Rule 16 Scheduling Conference for 09:00 AM on 11/25/2019 before MAGISTRATE JUDGE ROM TRADER - Signed by CHIEF JUDGE J. MICHAEL SEABRIGHT on 9/25/2019. (Attachments: #1 Memo from Clerk Re: Corporate Disclosure Statement) ATTACH THE SCHEDULING ORDER TO THE INITIATING DOCUMENT (COMPLAINT/NOTICE OF REMOVAL). THE SCHEDULING ORDER AND MEMO RE: CORPORATE DISCLOSURES MUST BE SERVED WITH THE DOCUMENT.(jo)
September 25, 2019 Filing 5 NOTICE of Case Assignment: Please reflect Civil Case Number CV 19-00512 JMS-RT on all further pleadings. (jo)
September 25, 2019 Filing 4 Summons (Proposed) (Batterman, Scott)
September 25, 2019 Filing 3 CIVIL Cover Sheet by Architecture Design West, P.C.. (Batterman, Scott)
September 25, 2019 Filing 2 Corporate Disclosure Statement by Architecture Design West, P.C.. (Batterman, Scott)
September 25, 2019 Filing 1 COMPLAINT against All Defendants ( Filing fee $ 400 receipt number 0975-2267471.), filed by Architecture Design West, P.C..(Batterman, Scott)

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

Search for this case: Architecture Design West, P.C. v. Raass Brothers, Inc.
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Raass Brothers, 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 ]
Defendant: Arch Insurance 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 ]
Plaintiff: Architecture Design West, P.C.
Represented By: Gerald S. Clay
Represented By: Scott I. Batterman
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?