Progressive Northern Insurance Co. v. Borden et al
| Progressive Northern Insurance Co. |
| Kelvin Borden and United States Postal Service |
| 3:2023cv03073 |
| September 12, 2023 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of Illinois |
| Reona J Daly |
| Personal Property: Other |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1331 Fed. Question: Tort Action |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on November 8, 2023. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 8 JUDGMENT IN A CIVIL CASE. Approved by Magistrate Judge Reona J. Daly on 11/8/2023. (jlm) |
Filing 7
ORDER: Plaintiff filed a Notice of Voluntary Dismissal (Doc. 6) pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1)(A)(i), which provides that no court order is necessary to dismiss an action upon notice by the plaintiff if the opposing party has neither answered nor filed a motion for summary judgment. Plaintiff's notice is proper pursuant to Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(i) and this case is therefore dismissed without prejudice. The Clerk of Court is directed to enter judgment accordingly. Signed by Magistrate Judge Reona J. Daly on 11/7/2023. (lmo)THIS TEXT ENTRY IS AN ORDER OF THE COURT. NO FURTHER DOCUMENTATION WILL BE MAILED.
|
| Filing 6 NOTICE of Voluntary Dismissal by Progressive Northern Insurance Co. (Krapfl, C. Bradley) |
| Filing 5 CONSENT/NON-CONSENT TO U.S. MAGISTRATE JUDGE - sealed pending receipt from all parties. (Krapfl, C. Bradley) |
| Filing 4 Summons Issued as to Kelvin Borden, United States Postal Service. Originals mailed to counsel for service. (adh) |
| Filing 3 NOTICE OF INITIAL ASSIGNMENT TO A U.S. MAGISTRATE JUDGE: This case has been randomly assigned to United States Magistrate Judge Reona J. Daly pursuant to Administrative Order 347. The parties are advised that their consent is required if the assigned Magistrate Judge is to conduct all further proceedings in this case, including trial and final entry of judgment pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 636(c) and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 73. As set forth in Administrative Order No. 347, each party will be required to file a Notice and Consent to Proceed Before a Magistrate Judge Jurisdiction form indicating consent or non-consent to the jurisdiction of the assigned Magistrate Judge. If all parties do not consent to the Magistrate Judge's jurisdiction, the case will be randomly assigned to a district judge for all further proceedings and the parties cannot later consent to reassignment of the case to a magistrate judge. The parties are further advised that they are free to withhold consent without adverse substantive consequences. Within 21 days of this Notice, the following party or parties must file the attached form indicating consent to proceed before the assigned Magistrate Judge or an affirmative declination to consent: Progressive Northern Insurance Co.. A link regarding the magistrate judges in this district is attached for your convenience: #https://www.ilsd.uscourts.gov/documents/BenefitsofConsent.pdf. All future documents must bear case number 3:23-cv-3073-RJD. Consent due by 10/3/2023 (adh) |
| Filing 2 NOTICE of Appearance by C. Bradley Krapfl on behalf of Progressive Northern Insurance Co. (Krapfl, C. Bradley) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT against All Defendants ( Filing fee $ 402 receipt number AILSDC-5184385.), filed by Progressive Northern Insurance Co.. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet, #2 Summons, #3 Summons)(Krapfl, C. Bradley) |
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.
