Ledesma v. Gary Railway Company et al
Frank Ledesma |
Gary Railway Company, United States Steel Corporation and Terry Carter |
2:2023cv00322 |
September 27, 2023 |
US District Court for the Northern District of Indiana |
John E Martin |
Philip P Simon |
P.I.: Other |
28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Petition for Removal |
Plaintiff |
Docket Report
This docket was last retrieved on February 5, 2024. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
Document Text |
---|
Filing 18 REPLY to Response to Motion re #12 MOTION to Remand to State Court filed by Frank Ledesma. (Benton, Thomas) |
Filing 17 RESPONSE to Motion re #12 MOTION to Remand to State Court Defendants' Response In Opposition to Plaintiff's Motion to Remand for Sanctions filed by Terry Carter, United States Steel Corporation. (Curtis, Justin) |
Filing 16 ORDER granting, for relief different than requested, #14 Motion for Extension of Time to File. Response to #5 to be filed by 12/19/2023, with leave to request additional extension as needed. Approved by Magistrate Judge John E Martin on 10/25/2023. No pdf attached(cp) |
Filing 15 NOTICE of Appearance by Thomas R Benton on behalf of Frank Ledesma (Benton, Thomas) |
Filing 14 First MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response in Opposition by Plaintiff Frank Ledesma. (Benton, Thomas) |
Filing 13 MEMORANDUM in Support of #12 MOTION to Remand to State Court filed by Frank Ledesma. (Benton, Thomas) |
Filing 12 MOTION to Remand to State Court by Plaintiff Frank Ledesma. (Benton, Thomas) |
Filing 11 MAGISTRATE JUDGE CONSENT FORMS sent to all parties.. Magistrate Consent forms due by 11/3/2023. (smb) |
Filing 10 ORDER: Each party and each attorney in this case shall take reasonable steps to preserve electronically stored information (ESI) that is relevant to any claim or defense in this case, whether or not the information is admissible at trial. This requirement relates back to the point in time when the party or attorney reasonably anticipated litigation about these matters. Text entry order. By Magistrate Judge John E Martin on 10/13/2023. (smb) |
Filing 9 Defendant United States Steel Corporation's ANSWER to #2 Complaint by United States Steel Corporation.(Curtis, Justin) Modified on 10/16/2023 to link complaint (mlc). |
Filing 8 ORDER: The Court STRIKES from the docket Defendant United States Steel Corporation's Answer to Plaintiff's Complaint #7 with leave to re-file a document that complies with the Local Rules on or before 10/13/2023. Signed by Magistrate Judge John E Martin on 10/06/2023. (jdb) |
Filing 7 ***STRICKEN per #8 Order*** Defendant United States Steel Corporation's ANSWER to Complaint by United States Steel Corporation.(Curtis, Justin) Modified on 10/6/2023 (jdb). |
Filing 6 MEMORANDUM in Support of #5 MOTION TO DISMISS FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM filed by Terry Carter. (Curtis, Justin) |
Filing 5 MOTION TO DISMISS FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM by Defendant Terry Carter. (Curtis, Justin) |
Filing 4 Corporate Disclosure Statement by United States Steel Corporation. (Curtis, Justin) |
Filing 3 NOTICE of Appearance by Justin K Curtis on behalf of Terry Carter, United States Steel Corporation (Curtis, Justin) |
***NEW CASE*** Judge Philip P Simon and Magistrate Judge John E Martin added. (jdb) |
Filing 1 NOTICE OF REMOVAL (Filing fee $ 402 receipt number AINNDC-5366772.) from Lake Superior Court, Cause No. 45D112308CT000958, filed by United States Steel Corporation. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A, #2 Exhibit B, #3 Exhibit C, #4 Civil Cover Sheet Civil Cover Sheet)(Curtis, Justin) |
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 Indiana 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.