Ponijan et al v. The Boeing Company
| PONIJAN, KATIMAH, SLAMET BOWO SANTOSO and BUDI SETIO |
| The Boeing Company |
| 1:2022cv04897 |
| September 9, 2022 |
| US District Court for the Northern District of Illinois |
| Franklin U Valderrama |
| P.I.: Airplane Product Liability |
| 28 U.S.C. § 1333 Admiralty |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on October 18, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 17 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Franklin U. Valderrama: For the reasons stated in the motion, the agreed motion to stay proceedings #16 is granted. This case, including all dates regarding briefing, submissions, and hearings, is stayed pending the resolution of the motion to reassign this case as related to Riyanto v. Boeing, 21-cv-04175. See Riyanto v. Boeing, 21-cv-01475 Dkt. 27 (N.D. Ill. Sept. 15, 2022). The parties shall submit a joint, written status report when the district court rules on the pending motion to reassign in Riyanto v. Boeing, 21-cv-04175. Mailed notice (axc). |
| Filing 16 MOTION by Defendant The Boeing Company to stay AGREED (Klein, Keith) |
| Filing 15 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Franklin U. Valderrama: The Court enters the following briefing schedule on Plaintiffs' motion to remand #14 : Defendant's response is due on or before 11/01/2022; Plaintiffs' reply is due on or before 11/15/2022. Mailed notice (axc). |
| Filing 14 MOTION by Plaintiffs Katimah, Ponijan, Slamet Bowo Santoso, Budi Setio to remand (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A, #2 Exhibit B, #3 Exhibit C, #4 Exhibit D, #5 Exhibit E, #6 Exhibit F)(Routh, Thomas) |
| Filing 13 ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiffs Katimah, Ponijan, Slamet Bowo Santoso, Budi Setio by Thomas Patrick Routh (Routh, Thomas) |
| Filing 12 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Franklin U. Valderrama: For the reasons stated in the motion, the Court grants Defendant's unopposed motion to set the date to answer or otherwise respond #11 . Defendants shall answer or otherwise respond to Plaintiff's Complaint on or before 11/08/2022. Mailed notice (axc). |
| Filing 11 MOTION by Defendant The Boeing Company to Set Time to Answer or Otherwise Respond to Complaint (Unopposed) (Klein, Keith) |
| Filing 10 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Franklin U. Valderrama: On the civil cover sheet #2 , Plaintiff indicated that this case is related to 1:21-cv-01475, Riyanto v. The Boeing Company. If any party intends to move to reassign this case to related case no. 1:21-cv-01475, they should file the appropriate motion for reassignment before Judge Dow in 1:21-cv-01475. See N.D. Ill. Local R. 40.4. Mailed notice (axc). |
| Filing 9 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Franklin U. Valderrama: On or before 11/23/2022, the parties shall file a joint initial status report. A template for the Joint Initial Status Report, setting forth the information required, may be found at http://www.ilnd.uscourts.gov/Judges.aspx by clicking on Judge Valderrama's name and then again on the link entitled 'Joint Initial Status Report. The removing party must serve this Minute Entry on all other parties. If the opposing party has not been served with notice pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1446(d) by that date, the removing party's counsel is instructed to file an individual status report indicating the status of notice of removal by the same deadline. The parties are further ordered to review all of Judge Valderrama's standing orders and the information available on his webpage. Any nongovernmental corporate party that qualifies under the Rules is reminded of the requirement to file a disclosure statement under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 7.1/N.D. Ill. Local Rule 3.2. Mailed notice (axc). |
| Filing 8 MAILED notice of removal letter to counsel of record. (nsf, ) |
| CASE ASSIGNED to the Honorable Franklin U. Valderrama. Designated as Magistrate Judge the Honorable Maria Valdez. Case assignment: Random assignment. (rc, ) |
| CLERK'S NOTICE: Pursuant to Local Rule 73.1(b), a United States Magistrate Judge of this court is available to conduct all proceedings in this civil action. If all parties consent to have the currently assigned United States Magistrate Judge conduct all proceedings in this case, including trial, the entry of final judgment, and all post-trial proceedings, all parties must sign their names on the attached #Consent To# form. This consent form is eligible for filing only if executed by all parties. The parties can also express their consent to jurisdiction by a magistrate judge in any joint filing, including the Joint Initial Status Report or proposed Case Management Order. (nsf, ) |
| Filing 7 ATTORNEY Appearance for Defendant The Boeing Company by Mack Harrison Shultz, Jr (Shultz, Mack) |
| Filing 6 ATTORNEY Appearance for Defendant The Boeing Company by Jillian Brett Sommers (Sommers, Jillian) |
| Filing 5 ATTORNEY Appearance for Defendant The Boeing Company by Daniel Patrick Ridlon (Ridlon, Daniel) |
| Filing 4 ATTORNEY Appearance for Defendant The Boeing Company by Keith G. Klein (Klein, Keith) |
| Filing 3 NOTIFICATION of Affiliates pursuant to Local Rule 3.2 by The Boeing Company (Klein, Keith) |
| Filing 2 CIVIL Cover Sheet (Klein, Keith) |
| Filing 1 NOTICE of Removal from Circuit Court of Cook County, Illinois, case number (2022-L-007420) filed by The Boeing Company Filing fee $ 402, receipt number AILNDC-19826918. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A, #2 Exhibit B, #3 Exhibit C)(Klein, Keith) |
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.
