HAEHL v. DR. BRITE, LLC
Plaintiff: AMY HAEHL
Defendant: DR. BRITE, LLC
Case Number: 1:2021cv02072
Filed: July 21, 2021
Court: US District Court for the Southern District of Indiana
Presiding Judge: Mark J Dinsmore
Referring Judge: James Patrick Hanlon
Nature of Suit: Copyright
Cause of Action: 17 U.S.C. ยง 101
Jury Demanded By: Plaintiff
Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on September 15, 2021. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
September 15, 2021 Filing 13 Unopposed MOTION for Extension of Time to September 28, 2021 to Responsively Plead, filed by Defendant DR. BRITE, LLC. (Attachments: #1 Text of Proposed Order)(Terpstra, John)
September 14, 2021 Filing 12 NOTICE of Parties' First Extension of Time re Filing a response to pleading defined by Fed. R. Civ. P. 7(a), filed by Defendant DR. BRITE, LLC. (Terpstra, John)
September 10, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 11 SCHEDULING ORDER: Initial Pretrial Conference set for 10/13/2021 10:00 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 9/10/2021.(SWM)
September 10, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 10 ORDER - This matter is before the Court on Defendant's Unopposed Motion for Initial Extension of Time. [Dkt. 9]. Defendant's motion requests a 41-day enlargement of time from August 18, 2021 to September 28, 2021 for Defendant to file a response to Plaintiff's Complaint. [Id.] Pursuant to Local Rule 6-1(a), all unopposed initial enlargements of time to respond to a pleading or discovery request are limited to 28 days and must be obtained by filing a notice of enlargement of time, not a motion. S.D. Ind. L.R. 6-1(a). Accordingly, Defendant's motion [Dkt. #9 ] is DENIED. Defendant is instructed to file a proper Notice of Enlargement, not to exceed 28 days, in compliance with the Local Rule. Signed by Magistrate Judge Mark J. Dinsmore on 9/10/2021. (SWM)
September 9, 2021 Filing 9 Unopposed MOTION for Extension of Time to September 28, 2021 in which to #1 Complaint , filed by Defendant DR. BRITE, LLC. (Attachments: #1 Text of Proposed Order Proposed Order)(Terpstra, John)
September 9, 2021 Filing 8 NOTICE of Appearance by Anna Mandula on behalf of Defendant DR. BRITE, LLC. (Mandula, Anna)
September 9, 2021 Filing 7 NOTICE of Appearance by John R. Terpstra on behalf of Defendant DR. BRITE, LLC. (Terpstra, John)
July 29, 2021 Filing 6 AFFIDAVIT of Service for Summons served on Dr. Brite, LLC on July 28, 2021, filed by AMY HAEHL. (Stohry, Bradley)
July 22, 2021 Filing 5 NOTICE of Change of Attorney Information. Consistent with Local Rule 5-3, Bradley M. Stohry hereby notifies the Clerk of the court of changed contact information. (Stohry, Bradley)
July 22, 2021 Filing 4 MAGISTRATE JUDGE's NOTICE of Availability to Exercise Jurisdiction issued. (LMK)
July 22, 2021 Filing 3 Summons Issued as to DR. BRITE, LLC. (LMK)
July 21, 2021 Filing 2 NOTICE of Appearance by Bradley M. Stohry on behalf of Plaintiff AMY HAEHL. (Stohry, Bradley)
July 21, 2021 Filing 1 COMPLAINT against DR. BRITE, LLC, filed by AMY HAEHL. (Filing fee $402, receipt number 0756-6665521) (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet, #2 Proposed Summons, #3 Exhibit A - Copyright Certificate)(Stohry, 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 Indiana Southern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: HAEHL v. DR. BRITE, LLC
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: AMY HAEHL
Represented By: Bradley M. Stohry
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: DR. BRITE, LLC
Represented By: Anna Mandula
Represented By: John R. Terpstra
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?