Taveras v. 3M Company
| Eric Taveras |
| 3M Company |
| 1:2019cv00870 |
| February 12, 2019 |
| US District Court for the Northern District of Illinois |
| Edmond E Chang |
| Personal Inj. Prod. Liability |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1332 |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on April 8, 2019. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 11 STATUS Report (Joint) on MDL Proceedings by 3M Company (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A)(Nomellini, Mark) |
| Filing 10 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Edmond E. Chang: The joint motion #6 to stay is granted as follows: all deadlines are suspended for now, as the parties await the MDL determination. The initial status hearing of 04/03/2019 is reset to 06/18/2019 at 9:30 a.m., with a concise status report on the MDL proceedings due the earlier of (1) three business days after a decision by the MDL Panel; or (2) 06/12/2019. Emailed notice (slb, ) |
| Filing 9 SUMMONS Returned Executed by Eric Taveras as to 3M Company on 2/25/2019, answer due 3/18/2019.(Kotin, Daniel) (Docket text modified by Clerk's Office) Modified on 3/26/2019 (bg, ). |
| Filing 8 NOTICE of Motion by Mark J Nomellini for presentment of motion to stay #6 before Honorable Edmond E. Chang on 4/1/2019 at 08:30 AM. (Nomellini, Mark) |
| Filing 7 NOTIFICATION of Affiliates pursuant to Local Rule 3.2 by 3M Company and FRCP 7.1 (Nomellini, Mark) |
| Filing 6 MOTION by Defendant 3M Company to stay (Joint) (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A, #2 Exhibit B)(Nomellini, Mark) |
| Filing 5 ATTORNEY Appearance for Defendant 3M Company by Mark J Nomellini (Nomellini, Mark) |
| Filing 4 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Edmond E. Chang: On review of the complaint, R. 1, it is not clear that Plaintiff filed in the correct venue under 28 U.S.C. 1391. Although Plaintiff is a resident of Illinois, Defendant is not, and it appears that the events giving rise to the claim occurred outside of Illinois. Moreover, it is not clear that there is personal jurisdiction over Defendant in this case, because it does not appear that Defendant is subject to general personal jurisdiction here nor are there allegations that the product at issue was manufactured, sold, or used in Illinois. See Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. v. Superior Court of California, San Francisco Cty., 137 S. Ct. 1773, 1776, (2017). The parties must address these issues in the initial status report in advance of the initial status hearing.Emailed notice (slb, ) |
| Filing 3 NOTICE TO THE PARTIES - The Court is participating in the Mandatory Initial Discovery Pilot (MIDP). The key features and deadlines are set forth in this Notice which includes a link to the (MIDP) Standing Order and a Checklist for use by the parties. In cases subject to the pilot, all parties must respond to the mandatory initial discovery requests set forth in the Standing Order before initiating any further discovery in this case. Please note: The discovery obligations in the Standing Order supersede the disclosures required by Rule 26(a)(1). Any party seeking affirmative relief must serve a copy of the following documents (Notice of Mandatory Initial Discovery and the Standing Order) on each new party when the Complaint, Counterclaim, Crossclaim, or Third-Party Complaint is served. (aee, ) |
| Filing 2 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Edmond E. Chang:Initial status hearing set for 04/03/2019 at 9:00 a.m. The parties must file a joint initial status report with the content described in the attached status report requirements at least 3 business days before the initial status hearing. Plaintiff must still file the report even if not all Defendants have been served or have responded to requests to craft a joint report. Because the Procedures are occasionally revised, counsel must read them anew even if counsel has appeared before Judge Chang in other cases. Emailed notice (Attachments: #1 Status Report Requirements) (slb, ) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT filed by Eric Taveras; Jury Demand. Filing fee $ 400, receipt number 0752-15475889. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet, #2 Attorney Appeance Form)(Kotin, Daniel) |
| CASE ASSIGNED to the Honorable Edmond E. Chang. Designated as Magistrate Judge the Honorable Sheila M. Finnegan. Case assignment: Random assignment. (jjr, ) |
| SUMMONS Issued as to Defendant 3M Company (jjr, ) |
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
| Search for this case: Taveras v. 3M Company | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Plaintiff: Eric Taveras | |
| Represented By: | Daniel M. Kotin |
| 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: 3M Company | |
| Represented By: | Mark J Nomellini |
| 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.
