Cronk v. Federal Bureau of Investigations et al
Plaintiff: David Ethan Cronk
Defendant: Federal Bureau of Investigations, Federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives and Indiana State Police Department
Case Number: 4:2022cv00051
Filed: August 1, 2022
Court: US District Court for the Northern District of Indiana
Presiding Judge: James T Moody
Referring Judge: Andrew P Rodovich
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights: Other
Cause of Action: 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 Civil Rights Act
Jury Demanded By: None
Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on September 18, 2023. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
September 29, 2022 Opinion or Order Reset Answer Deadlines pursuant to #10 Agreed Notice. Answer due on or before 11/1/2022 for Defendants Federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives and Federal Bureau of Investigations. (shk)
September 28, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 10 AGREED NOTICE to extend time to file answer filed by Federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives, Federal Bureau of Investigations ; answer due by 11/1/2022. (Trzyna - AUSA, Kathleen)
September 28, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 9 NOTICE of Appearance by Kathleen T Trzyna - AUSA on behalf of Federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives, Federal Bureau of Investigations (Trzyna - AUSA, Kathleen)
September 26, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 8 ORDER: The Court GRANTS #7 State Defendant's Motion for Extension of Time to Respond to Plaintiff's Complaint. The deadline for Defendant Indiana State Police Department to answer to otherwise respond is EXTENDED to 10/4/2022. Approved by Magistrate Judge Andrew P Rodovich on 9/26/2022. Text entry only. (tc)
September 26, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 7 MOTION for Extension of Time to File Answer re #1 Complaint, by Defendant Indiana State Police Department. (Jimenez, Gustavo)
August 29, 2022 Opinion or Order Reset Answer Deadline pursuant to Agreed Notice #6 . Answer due for Defendant Indiana State Police on or before 9/26/2022. (shk)
August 26, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 6 AGREED NOTICE to extend time to file answer filed by Indiana State Police Department ; answer due by September 26, 2022. (Jimenez, Gustavo)
August 18, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 5 MINUTE 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 Andrew P Rodovich on 8/18/2022. (tc)
August 17, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 4 NOTICE of Appearance by Alexander R Carlisle on behalf of Indiana State Police Department (Carlisle, Alexander)
August 17, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 3 NOTICE of Appearance by Gustavo A Jimenez on behalf of Indiana State Police Department (Jimenez, Gustavo)
August 2, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 2 Summons Issued as to Federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives, Federal Bureau of Investigations, Indiana State Police Department. NOTE:The attached document is accessible by court personnel only. Summons forms that were electronically submitted to the court for issuance will be returned to counsel via e-mail. (Attachments: #1 FBATF, #2 Attorney General, #3 US Attorney (FBI), #4 FBI, #5 ISP)(asd)
August 2, 2022 Opinion or Order Senior Judge James T Moody and Magistrate Judge Andrew P Rodovich added. **NEW CASE** (asd)
August 1, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 1 COMPLAINT against All Defendants ( Filing fee $ 402 receipt number AINNDC-4983355.), filed by David Ethan Cronk. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A-J, #2 Civil Cover Sheet, #3 Proposed Summons FBI c/o US Dept. of Justice, #4 Proposed Summons FBI c/o US Attorney, #5 Proposed Summons FBATF c/o US Dept. of Justice, #6 Proposed Summons FBATF c/o US Attorney, #7 Proposed Summons ISP c/o Doug Carter, #8 Proposed Summons ISP c/o Attorney General)(Dietrich, Steven)

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 this case: Cronk v. Federal Bureau of Investigations et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: David Ethan Cronk
Represented By: Steven K Dietrich
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Federal Bureau of Investigations
Represented By: Kathleen T Trzyna - AUSA
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives
Represented By: Kathleen T Trzyna - AUSA
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Indiana State Police Department
Represented By: Alexander R Carlisle
Represented By: Gustavo A Jimenez
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]

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.


Why Is My Information Online?