HEIDELBERGER v. P.I.P.E., INC. et al
BLAKE HEIDELBERGER |
P.I.P.E., INC. and WAYNE PARRISH |
1:2020cv02657 |
October 13, 2020 |
US District Court for the Southern District of Indiana |
Mark J Dinsmore |
Tanya Walton Pratt |
Labor: Fair Standards |
Plaintiff |
Docket Report
This docket was last retrieved on December 10, 2020. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
Document Text |
---|
Filing 17 Corporate Disclosure Statement by P.I.P.E., INC.. (Smith, Donald) |
Filing 16 NOTICE to File Corporate Disclosure Statement to P.I.P.E., INC.. (RAGS) (NAD) |
Filing 15 ANSWER to #1 Complaint , filed by All Defendants.(Smith, Donald) |
Filing 14 NOTICE of Appearance by Donald S. Smith on behalf of Defendants P.I.P.E., INC., WAYNE PARRISH. (Smith, Donald) |
Filing 13 SCHEDULING ORDER: Initial Pretrial Conference set for 12/30/2020 09:30 AM (Eastern Time) in Telephonic before Magistrate Judge Mark J. Dinsmore Counsel shall attend the conference by calling the designated telephone number, to be provided by the Court via email generated by the Court's ECF system. The parties shall file a proposed Case Management Plan ("CMP") no fewer than seven days before the pretrial conference. Section III(A) through (E) of the proposed CMP shall include the following deadlines (see Order for established deadlines and additional information). Signed by Magistrate Judge Mark J. Dinsmore on 12/3/2020.(SWM) |
Filing 12 ORDER granting Defendants' #11 Motion for Extension of Time to File response to complaint 12/16/2020. Signed by Magistrate Judge Mark J. Dinsmore on 12/3/2020. (SWM) |
Filing 11 First MOTION for Extension of Time to December 16, 2020 to Answer Complaint, filed by Defendants P.I.P.E., INC., WAYNE PARRISH. (Attachments: #1 Text of Proposed Order Order Granting First Motion for Enlargement of Time)(Money, Randy) |
Filing 10 First MOTION for Extension of Time to December 16, 2020 to Answer Complaint, filed by Defendants P.I.P.E., INC., WAYNE PARRISH. (Money, Randy) |
Filing 9 NOTICE of Appearance by Randy Lee Money on behalf of Defendants P.I.P.E., INC., WAYNE PARRISH. (Money, Randy) |
Filing 8 AFFIDAVIT of Service for Summons & Complaint served on P.I.P.E., Inc. & Wayne Parrish on October 29, 2020, filed by BLAKE HEIDELBERGER. (Attachments: #1 Affidavit Service Affidavit)(Weldy, Ronald) |
Filing 7 Summons Issued as to P.I.P.E., INC., WAYNE PARRISH. (NAD) |
Filing 6 Entry Concerning Selected Matters - The court, having considered the above action and the matters which are pending, makes the following rulings: Plaintiff's request to proceed in forma pauperis is granted. The clerk shall endorse and return the summonses tendered by Plaintiff to counsel for Plaintiff. Counsel for Plaintiff is responsible for serving process on Defendant. Signed by Judge Tanya Walton Pratt on 10/26/2020. (NAD) |
Filing 5 MAGISTRATE JUDGE's NOTICE of Availability to Exercise Jurisdiction issued. (AKH) |
Filing 4 **PLEASE DISREGARD - DOCKETED IN ERROR** Summons Issued as to P.I.P.E., INC., WAYNE PARRISH. (AKH) Modified on 10/14/2020 (AKH). |
Filing 3 MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis , filed by Plaintiff BLAKE HEIDELBERGER. (Attachments: #1 Affidavit, #2 Text of Proposed Order)(Weldy, Ronald) |
Filing 2 NOTICE of Appearance by Ronald E. Weldy on behalf of Plaintiff BLAKE HEIDELBERGER. (Weldy, Ronald) |
Filing 1 COMPLAINT for Damages against All Defendants, filed by BLAKE HEIDELBERGER. (No fee paid with this filing) (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet, #2 Proposed Summons)(Weldy, Ronald) |
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 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.