Sugarman v. Research In Motion, Ltd. et al
| William Sugarman |
| Research In Motion, Ltd. and Research In Motion, Corp. |
| 1:2011cv08384 |
| November 22, 2011 |
| US District Court for the Northern District of Illinois |
| Chicago Office |
| Cook |
| Amy J Eve |
| Contract: Other |
| 28 U.S.C. § 1330 Breach of Contract |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on May 30, 2012. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 33 MINUTE entry before Honorable Amy J. St. Eve: Pursuant to plaintiff's notice of voluntary dismissal, this case is hereby dismissed without prejudice. All pending dates and deadlines are stricken and all pending motions are denied as moot without prejudice. Civil case terminated. Mailed notice (kef, ) |
| Filing 32 NOTICE of Voluntary Dismissal by William Sugarman Pursuant to Rule 41(a)(1) (McClintick, James) |
| Filing 31 MINUTE entry before Honorable Amy J. St. Eve: Plaintiff's second unopposed motion for extension of time #29 is granted. Plaintiff's response to defendant's motion to compel arbitration or dismiss #24 shall be filed on or before 5/29/12. Reply by 6/19/12. Status hearing set for 7/24/12 is stricken and reset to 8/7/12 at 8:30 a.m. No appearance is required on the 5/22/12 notice date.Mailed notice (kef, ) |
| Filing 30 NOTICE of Motion by James Morris McClintick for presentment of motion for extension of time to file response/reply #29 before Honorable Amy J. St. Eve on 5/22/2012 at 08:30 AM. (McClintick, James) |
| Filing 29 MOTION by Plaintiff William Sugarman for extension of time to file response/reply to Defendants' Motion to Compel Arbitration or Dismiss (McClintick, James) |
| Filing 28 MINUTE entry before Honorable Amy J. St. Eve: Plaintiff's motion for extension of time #26 is granted. Plaintiff's response to defendant's motion to compel arbitration or dismiss #24 should be filed on or before 5/15/12. Reply by 6/5/12. Status hearing set for 7/12/12 is stricken and reset to 7/24/12 at 8:30 a.m. No appearance is required on the 5/3/12 notice date. Mailed notice (kef, ) |
| Filing 27 NOTICE of Motion by James Morris McClintick for presentment of motion for extension of time to file response/reply #26 before Honorable Amy J. St. Eve on 5/3/2012 at 08:30 AM. (McClintick, James) |
| Filing 26 MOTION by Plaintiff William Sugarman for extension of time to file response/reply to Defendants' Motion to Compel Arbitration/Motion to Dismiss (McClintick, James) |
| Filing 25 MEMORANDUM by Research In Motion, Corp., Research In Motion, Ltd. in support of motion to compel, Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim #24 (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A-E)(Webb, Dan) |
| Filing 24 MOTION by Defendants Research In Motion, Corp., Research In Motion, Ltd. to compel Arbitration or in the Alternative, MOTION TO DISMISS FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM (Webb, Dan) |
| Filing 23 NOTIFICATION of Affiliates pursuant to Local Rule 3.2 by Research In Motion, Corp., Research In Motion, Ltd. (Bauer, Julie) |
| Filing 22 MINUTE entry before Honorable Amy J. St. Eve: Status hearing held on 2/8/2012 and continued to 7/12/2012 at 08:30 AM. Plaintiff's motion for class certification #5 is denied without prejudice. Defendants are on notice that this a putative class action case. Defendants' motion to compel arbitration/motion to dismiss should be filed by 3/1/12. Defendants are given leave to file their memorandum in support up to 20 pages. Response, up to 20 pages, by 5/1/12. Reply by 5/22/12. Discovery is deferred until after the court rules on defendants' motion. Mailed notice (kef, ) |
| Filing 21 ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff William Sugarman by Gregg Michael Barbakoff (Barbakoff, Gregg) |
| Filing 20 STATUS Report (Initial Joint) by Research In Motion, Corp., Research In Motion, Ltd., William Sugarman (Bauer, Julie) |
| Filing 19 ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff William Sugarman by James Morris McClintick (McClintick, James) |
| Filing 18 MINUTE entry before Honorable Amy J. St. Eve: Defendants' agreed motion for extension of time #16 is granted. Defendants should answer or otherwise plead by 3/1/12. No appearance is required on the 2/2/12 notice date. Status hearing remains set for 2/8/12 at 8:30 a.m. Mailed notice (kef, ) |
| Filing 17 NOTICE of Motion by Julie Anne Bauer for presentment of motion for extension of time to file answer, motion for relief #16 before Honorable Amy J. St. Eve on 2/2/2012 at 08:30 AM. (Bauer, Julie) |
| Filing 16 MOTION by Defendants Research In Motion, Corp., Research In Motion, Ltd. for extension of time to file answer regarding complaint #1 (Agreed) (Bauer, Julie) |
| Filing 15 MINUTE entry before Honorable Amy J. St. Eve: Defendants' agreed motion for extension of time #13 is granted. Defendants should answer or otherwise plead by 2/1/12. Joint status report due by 2/3/12. Status hearing and hearing on plaintiff's motion for class certification #5 set for 1/10/12 is stricken and reset to 2/8/12 at 8:30 a.m. No appearance is required on the 12/21/11 notice date.Mailed notice (kef, ) |
| Filing 14 NOTICE of Motion by Julie Anne Bauer for presentment of motion for extension of time to file answer, motion for relief #13 before Honorable Amy J. St. Eve on 12/21/2011 at 08:30 AM. (Bauer, Julie) |
| Filing 13 MOTION by Defendants Research In Motion, Corp., Research In Motion, Ltd. for extension of time to file answer regarding complaint #1 or to otherwise plead (Agreed) (Bauer, Julie) |
| Filing 12 ATTORNEY Appearance for Defendants Research In Motion, Corp., Research In Motion, Ltd. by Bradley N Lewis (Lewis, Bradley) |
| Filing 11 ATTORNEY Appearance for Defendants Research In Motion, Corp., Research In Motion, Ltd. by Christopher B Essig (Essig, Christopher) |
| Filing 10 ATTORNEY Appearance for Defendants Research In Motion, Corp., Research In Motion, Ltd. by Julie Anne Bauer (Bauer, Julie) |
| Filing 9 ATTORNEY Appearance for Defendants Research In Motion, Corp., Research In Motion, Ltd. by Dan K. Webb (Webb, Dan) |
| Filing 8 MINUTE entry before Honorable Amy J. St. Eve:Motion hearing held on 12/13/2011. Plaintiff's motion for class certification #5 is entered and continued to 1/10/2012 at 08:30 AM.Mailed notice (kef, ) |
| Filing 7 MINUTE entry before Honorable Amy J. St. Eve: Initial status hearing set for 1/10/12 at 8:30 a.m. in courtroom 1241. Parties should refer to Judge St. Eve's web page at www.ilnd.uscourts.gov and file a joint status report by 1/5/12 as set forth in the Initial Status Conferences procedure. Hearing on plaintiff's motion for class certification #5 set for 12/13/12 at 8:30 a.m. Mailed notice (kef, ) |
| Filing 6 EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE ORDER: Case reassigned to the Honorable Amy J. St. Eve for all further proceedings. Signed by Executive Committee on 11/28/11.(psm, ) |
| Filing 5 MOTION by Plaintiff William Sugarman to certify class (Vold, Aleksandra) |
| SUMMONS Issued as to Defendants Research In Motion, Corp., Research In Motion, Ltd. (mh, ) |
| CASE ASSIGNED to the Honorable Marvin E. Aspen. Designated as Magistrate Judge the Honorable Michael T. Mason. (nsf, ) |
| Filing 4 ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff William Sugarman by Aleksandra M. S. Vold (Vold, Aleksandra) |
| Filing 3 ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff William Sugarman by Joseph J Siprut (Siprut, Joseph) |
| Filing 2 CIVIL Cover Sheet (Siprut, Joseph) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT filed by William Sugarman; Jury Demand. Filing fee $ 350, receipt number 0752-6596736.(Siprut, Joseph) |
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 Illinois 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
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.
