State of Hawaii, The, ex rel. Anne E. Lopez, Attorney General v. 3M Company et al
| State of Hawaii, The |
| EIDP, Inc., 3M Company, AGC Chemicals Americas, Inc., Archroma U.S., Inc., Arkema Inc., BASF Corporation, Buckeye Fire Equipment Company, Chemdesign Products, Inc., Chemguard, Inc., Clariant Corporation, Corteva, Inc., Dupont de Nemours, Inc., Dynax Corporation, E.I. du Pont de Nemours and Company, Chemours Company, The, Tyco Fire Products LP and ABC Corporation 1-10 (Names Fictitious) |
| 1:2024cv00009 |
| January 8, 2024 |
| US District Court for the District of Hawaii |
| WES REBER PORTER |
| DERRICK K WATSON |
| Tort Product Liability |
| 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Petition for Removal- Product Liability |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on January 30, 2024. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 18 NOTICE of Case Reassignment: Please reflect Civil case number CV 24-00009 DKW-WRP on all further pleadings. (eta) |
| Filing 17 EO: The Court DIRECTS the Clerk's Office to reassign this case to a district judge. Magistrate Judge Wes Reber Porter will remain as the magistrate judge. (MAGISTRATE JUDGE WES REBER PORTER) (jo) |
| Case transferred to District of South Carolina (re MDL 2873, In Re: Aqueous Film-Forming Foams Products Liability Litigation). Electronic file, transfer order, and docket sheet sent. (eta) |
| Filing 15 TRANSMITTAL of DOCUMENTS from the District of South Carolina, CONDITIONAL TRANSFER ORDER (CTO-171) (certified), MDL 2873, In Re: Aqueous Film-Forming Foams Product Liability Litigation. (eta) Modified on 2/9/2024 opened under 2:24-cv-00488 in the District of South Carolina (eta). |
| Filing 14 TRANSMITTAL of DOCUMENTS from the United States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation, MDL No. 2873, In Re: Aqueous Film-Forming Foams Product Liability Litigation: As stipulated in Rule 7.1(c) of the Rules of Procedure of the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation, transmittal of the order has been stayed 7 days to give any party an opportunity to oppose the transfer. The 7-day period has now elapsed, no opposition was received, and the order is directed to the Clerk of the United States District Court for the D. South Carolina for filing. The Panel governing statute, 28 U.S.C. 1407, requires that the transferee clerk transmit a certified copy of the Panel order to transfer to the clerk of the district court from which the action is being transferred. (eta) |
| Filing 13 TRANSMITTAL of DOCUMENTS: CONDITIONAL TRANSFER ORDER (CTO-171) received from the United States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation, MDL No. 2873, In Re: Aqueous Film-Forming Foams Products Liability Litigation. Pursuant to Rule 7.1 of the Rules of Procedure of the United States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation, the action(s) on the attached schedule are transferred under 28 U.S.C. 1407 to the District of South Carolina for the reasons stated in the order of December 7, 2018, and, with the consent of that court, assigned to the Honorable Richard M. Gergel. This order does not become effective until it is filed in the Office of the Clerk of the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina. The transmittal of this order to said Clerk shall be stayed 7 days from the entry thereof. If any party files a notice of opposition with the Clerk of the Panel within this 7-day period, the stay will be continued until further order of the Panel. (eta) |
| Filing 12 EO: The Court is in receipt of Defendant 3M Company's #10 First Unopposed Motion to Extend Responsive Pleading Deadlines and Stay Proceedings (Motion). While the Motion states that Plaintiff agrees to an extension of the responsive pleading deadline and a stay of this case, the Motion does not clearly state that all Defendants have agreed to the requested relief. Accordingly, by no later than January 31, 2024, any party may file an opposition or statement in response to the Motion. Alternatively, Defendant 3M Company may file a declaration at any time stating that it has conferred with the other Defendants and they agree to the relief requested in the Motion. (MAGISTRATE JUDGE WES REBER PORTER) (jo) |
| Filing 11 NOTICE of Appearance by Wade H. Hargrove, III on behalf of State of Hawaii, The on behalf of State of Hawaii, The. (Attachments: #1 Certificate of Service)(Hargrove, Wade) |
| Filing 10 First Unopposed MOTION to Extend Responsive Pleading Deadline and Stay Proceedings as to #1 Notice of Removal, Corlis J. Chang appearing for Defendant 3M Company (Attachments: #1 Declaration of Corlis J. Chang , #2 Exhibit A, #3 Exhibit B, #4 Proposed Order)(Chang, Corlis) Modified on 1/16/2024 (eta). |
| Filing 9 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE by Chemguard, Inc., Tyco Fire Products LP re #8 Corporate Disclosure Statement of Defendants Tyco Fire Products, LP and Chemguard, Inc. (Louie, David) |
| Filing 8 Corporate Disclosure Statement by Chemguard, Inc., Tyco Fire Products LP. (Louie, David) |
| Filing 7 STATEMENT of Filing and Service of Removal filed by 3M Company, Chemguard, Inc., Tyco Fire Products LP. (Chang, Corlis) |
| Filing 6 NOTICE OF ASSIGNMENT TO UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE. PLEASE COMPLETE AND FILE THE ATTACHED ELECTION FORM (FILING INSTRUCTIONS ARE ATTACHED). While the decision to consent or not to consent to the exercise of jurisdiction by the magistrate judge is entirely voluntarily, the duty to respond to this notice is mandatory. Each party must indicate consent or decline to consent by completing the attached Election Form and filing it with the court no later than twenty-one (21) days after entry of appearance. In the event a dispositive motion is filed prior to the date on which the submission of the Election Form is required, the parties must return the completed Election Form within seven (7) calendar days after the motion is filed. (Attachments: #1 Election Form) ATTACH THE NOTICE AND ELECTION FORM TO THE INITIATING DOCUMENT (COMPLAINT/NOTICE OF REMOVAL). THE NOTICE AND ELECTION FORM MUST BE SERVED WITH THE DOCUMENT. (eta) |
| Filing 5 Notice to Parties Re: Corporate Disclosure Statements: Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 7.1 and Criminal Rule 12.4 both address the filing of Corporate Disclosure Statements. Both rules state A party must:(1) file the Rule 7.1(a) (or 12.4(a)) statement with its first appearance, pleading, petition, motion, response, or other request addressed to the court, and (2) promptly file a supplemental statement upon a change in the information that the statement requires. (eta) |
Filing 4
Order Setting Telephonic Rule 16 Scheduling Conference is set for 09:00AM on 2/12/2024 before MAGISTRATE JUDGE WES REBER PORTER - Signed by CHIEF JUDGE DERRICK K. WATSON on 1/8/2024. ATTACH THE SCHEDULING ORDER TO THE INITIATING DOCUMENT (COMPLAINT/NOTICE OF REMOVAL). THE SCHEDULING ORDER MUST BE SERVED WITH THE DOCUMENT. (eta)
|
| Filing 3 NOTICE of Case Assignment: Please reflect Civil case number CV 24-00009 WRP on all further pleadings. (eta) |
| Filing 2 Corporate Disclosure Statement by 3M Company. (Chang, Corlis) |
| Filing 1 NOTICE OF REMOVAL by 3M Company, Tyco Fire Products LP, Chemguard, Inc. from Circuit Court of the First Circuit, State of Hawaii, case number 1CCV-23-0001612. ( Filing fee $ 405 receipt number AHIDC-2942015), filed by 3M Company, Tyco Fire Products LP, Chemguard, Inc.. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A: Complaint, #2 Exhibit B: Docket Sheet, #3 Exhibit C: Summons, #4 Civil Cover Sheet)(Chang, Corlis) Modified on 1/9/2024 (eta). |
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 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.
