Doe v. Gazaway et al
| Jane Doe (a pseudonym) and Jane Doe |
| MCCORMACK BARON MANAGEMENT INC, Steven Gazaway and McCormack Baron Management, Inc. |
| 1:2019cv01439 |
| February 27, 2019 |
| US District Court for the Northern District of Illinois |
| John Z Lee |
| Other Statutory Actions |
| 28 U.S.C. § 1331 |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on April 22, 2019. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 17 PRO SE Appearance by Defendant Steven Gazaway (cc, ) |
| Filing 16 ANSWER to Complaint by Steven Gazaway(cc, ) |
| Filing 15 MINUTE entry before the Honorable John Z. Lee:Motion for extension of time until May 8, 2019 to answer #12 is granted. The status hearing set for 5/2/19 is reset to 5/21/19 at 9:00 a.m. No appearance is required on the motion.Mailed notice (ca, ) |
| Filing 14 SUMMONS Returned Executed by Jane Doe as to All Defendants. (Noland, John) |
| Filing 13 NOTICE of Motion by Julia L. Potts for presentment of extension of time #12 before Honorable John Z. Lee on 4/23/2019 at 09:00 AM. (Potts, Julia) |
| Filing 12 MOTION by Defendant McCormack Baron Management, Inc. for extension of time Unopposed (Potts, Julia) |
| Filing 11 ATTORNEY Appearance for Defendant McCormack Baron Management, Inc. by Julia L. Potts (Attachments: #1 Certificate of Service)(Potts, Julia) |
| Filing 10 ATTORNEY Appearance for Defendant McCormack Baron Management, Inc. by Thomas Gerald Cronin (Attachments: #1 Certificate of Service)(Cronin, Thomas) |
| ALIAS Summons Issued as to Defendants Steven Gazaway, McCormack Baron Management, Inc.. (mc, ) |
| Filing 9 CERTIFICATE by Plaintiff's Attorneys Regarding Discovery Obligations Under Mandatory Initial Discovery Pilot Project by Cocounsel John Noland Jr and CoCounsel Bruce Rafalson (Noland, John) |
| Filing 8 MINUTE entry before the Honorable John Z. Lee:Motion for leave to appear pro hac vice by Bruce Rafalson #6 is granted.Mailed notice (ca, ) |
| Filing 7 MINUTE entry before the Honorable John Z. Lee: Initial status hearing set for 5/2/19 at 9:00 a.m. Judge Lee participates in the Mandatory Initial Discovery Pilot Project ("Project"). The Project applies to all cases filed on or after June 1, 2017, excluding the following: (1) cases exempted by Rule 26(a)(1)(B), (2) actions brought by a person in the custody of the United States, a state, or a state subdivision, regardless of whether an attorney is recruited, (3) actions under the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act, (4) patent cases governed by the Local Patent Rules, and (5) cases transferred for consolidated administration in the District by the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation ("Exempt Cases").For all cases to which the Project applies, Judge Lee requires (1) each attorney appearing on behalf of Plaintiff(s) to file a "Certification by Attorney Regarding Discovery Obligations Under Mandatory Initial Discovery Pilot Project" form within 28 days after the filing of the Complaint and (2) each attorney appearing on behalf of Defendant(s) to file the certification form with the Answer. The parties are directed to file a joint initial status report four business days prior to the initial status hearing. The certification form and initial status report requirements are set forth in Judge Lee's standing order regarding the "Mandatory Initial Discovery Pilot Project" available on the Courts website. For all Exempt Cases, the parties are directed to file a joint initial status report four business days prior to the initial status hearing in accordance with the standing order governing "Initial Status Report in Cases Exempt from the Mandatory Initial Discovery Pilot Project" also available on the Court's website. Mailed notice (ca, ) |
| Filing 6 MOTION for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice Filing fee $ 150, receipt number 0752-15536512. & 1] To Waive Personal Hearing Attendance & 2} For order effective nunc pro tunc to complaint 2-27-19 filing date (Noland, John) |
| Filing 5 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. (sxb, ) |
| SUMMONS Issued as to Defendants Steven Gazaway, McCormack Baron Management, Inc. (pj, ) |
| CASE ASSIGNED to the Honorable John Z. Lee. Designated as Magistrate Judge the Honorable Susan E. Cox. Case assignment: Random assignment. (pj, ) |
| Filing 4 CIVIL Cover Sheet (Noland, John) |
| Filing 3 Document Entered in Error (Noland, John) (Docket Text Modified by Clerk's Office) (sxb, ). |
| Filing 2 Document Entered in Error (Noland, John) (Docket Text Modified by Clerk's Office) (sxb, ). |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT filed by Jane Doe (a pseudonym) ; jury demand. Filing fee $ 400, receipt number 0752-15534710.(Noland, John) |
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.
