Jones v. Chevron U.S.A., Inc. et al
| Daniel Jones |
| Chevron U.S.A., Inc., Syngenta AG and Syngenta Crop Protection, LLC |
| Randi Ellis |
| 3:2022pq01255 |
| June 13, 2022 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of Illinois |
| Nancy J Rosenstengel |
| Personal Inj. Prod. Liability |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1332 Diversity-Product Liability |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on June 29, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 5 WAIVER OF SERVICE Returned Executed by Daniel Jones. Chevron U.S.A., Inc. waiver sent on 6/13/2022, answer due 8/12/2022. (Williamson, Amanda) |
| Filing 4 WAIVER OF SERVICE Returned Executed by Daniel Jones. Syngenta Crop Protection, LLC waiver sent on 6/13/2022, answer due 8/12/2022. (Williamson, Amanda) |
| Filing 3 WAIVER OF SERVICE Returned Executed by Daniel Jones. Syngenta AG waiver sent on 6/13/2022, answer due 8/12/2022. (Williamson, Amanda) |
| Filing 2 Notice of Judge Assignment. Chief Judge Nancy J. Rosenstengel assigned. All future documents must bear case number 22-pq-1225-NJR. Refer to Civil/Removal Case Processing Requirements, found on the ILSD website, for further service information. (mar) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT against All Defendants ( Filing fee $ 402 receipt number AILSDC-4808104.), filed by Daniel Jones. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet)(Williamson, Amanda) |
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 Southern 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.
