Haarslev, Inc. v. Muir et al
| Haarslev, Inc. |
| Jeff Muir and JLM Management, LLC |
| 2:2023cv02567 |
| December 26, 2023 |
| US District Court for the District of Kansas |
| Rachel E Schwartz |
| Kathryn H Vratil |
| Personal Property: Other |
| 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Petition for Removal- Property Damage |
| Both |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on March 25, 2024. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 18
ORDER granting #17 Unopposed Motion to Stay Discovery Scheduling Conference, Rule 26(f) Planning Conference and Rule 26(a) Initial Disclosures. The Court grants the motion as unopposed and vacates the current March 19, 2024 scheduling conference setting and all related deadlines set out in the #15 Initial Order Regarding Planning and Scheduling. Discovery is stayed pending a ruling on #4 Defendants' Motion to Dismiss. If any live dispute remains after the Court's ruling on the Motion to Dismiss, within seven calendar days of that ruling, the parties are directed to submit a proposed scheduling order and the parties' initial Rule 26(a)(1) disclosures consistent with the process outlined in the #15 Initial Order Regarding Planning and Scheduling. The Court thereafter will reschedule the scheduling conference. Signed by Magistrate Judge Rachel E. Schwartz on 2/8/2024. (This is a TEXT ENTRY ONLY. There is no.pdf document associated with this entry.) (jrh)
|
| Filing 17 Unopposed MOTION to Stay Discovery re #15 Initial Order Regarding Planning and Scheduling, by Defendants JLM Management, LLC, Jeff Muir (referred to Magistrate Judge Rachel E. Schwartz) (Lewis, Diane) |
| Filing 16 REPLY TO RESPONSE TO MOTION by Defendants JLM Management, LLC, Jeff Muir re: #4 Motion to Dismiss, (Lewis, Diane) |
|
Filing 15
INITIAL ORDER REGARDING PLANNING AND SCHEDULING: Scheduling Conference set for March 19, 2024, at 10:00 a.m. by telephone (CONFERENCE LINE 1-888-363-4749; ACCESS CODE 5705809) before Magistrate Judge Rachel E. Schwartz. Rule 26 Planning Conference Deadline 2/19/2024. Rule 26 Initial Disclosures Deadline set for 2/26/2024. Proposed Scheduling Order Deadline 2/26/2024. Signed by Magistrate Judge Rachel E. Schwartz on 02/05/2024. (drk)
|
| Filing 14 CORPORATE DISCLOSURE STATEMENT by Haarslev, Inc. identifying Haarslev Industries A/S as corporate parent (Second Amended) (Leiker, Jason) |
|
Filing 13
ORDER regarding #11 Plaintiff's Amended Corporate Disclosure Statement. The Court has reviewed Plaintiff's amended Rule 7.1 disclosure statement and it does not address the deficiencies the Court noted in its order requiring amended Rule 7.1 disclosure statements. ECF No. 9. Plaintiff states that it is wholly owned by Haarslev Industries A/S, which is a citizen of Demark. Plaintiff, however, does not identify its own citizenship, which is what is used to determine whether diversity jurisdiction exists. If an entity is a corporation, its citizenship is both where it is incorporated and the state where its principal place of business is located. 28 U.S.C. 1332(c)(1); Newsome v. Gallacher, 722 F.3d 1257, 1267 (10th Cir. 2013). On or before February 2, 2024, Plaintiff is ordered to file an amended Rule 7.1 disclosure statement that identifies its state of incorporation and its principal place of business. Signed by Magistrate Judge Rachel E. Schwartz on 1/25/2024. (This is a TEXT ENTRY ONLY. There is no.pdf document associated with this entry.)(jrh)
|
| Filing 12 RESPONSE by Plaintiff Haarslev, Inc. re #4 Motion to Dismiss, Affidavit of Troels Svendsen (Attachments: #1 Affidavit)(Leiker, Jason) |
| Filing 11 CORPORATE DISCLOSURE STATEMENT by Haarslev, Inc. identifying Haarslev Industries A/S as corporate parent (Amended) (Leiker, Jason) |
| Filing 10 CORPORATE DISCLOSURE STATEMENT by JLM Management, LLC, Jeff Muir identifying NONE as corporate parent . (Lewis, Diane) |
|
Filing 9
ORDER re (ECF No. 5) Order Requiring Rule 7.1(a)(2) Disclosure Statements. The Court previously ordered all parties to file corporate disclosure statements with all information required by revised Rule 7.1(a)(2) by January 12, 2024. Both Defendants have failed to file any disclosure statements. Plaintiff did file a #7 corporate disclosure statement, but Plaintiff did not identify its citizenship, as required by Rule 7.1. On or before January 22, 2024, all parties must file Rule 7.1 disclosure statements. As previously ordered, each disclosure statement must identify the name and citizenship (not just the residence) of every individual or entity whose citizenship is attributed to that party. Signed by Magistrate Judge Rachel E. Schwartz on 1/18/2024. (This is a TEXT ENTRY ONLY. There is no.pdf document associated with this entry.)(jrh)
|
| Filing 8 ENTRY OF APPEARANCE by Jacob M. Doleshal on behalf of Haarslev, Inc. (Doleshal, Jacob) |
| Filing 7 CORPORATE DISCLOSURE STATEMENT by Haarslev, Inc. identifying Haarslev Industries A/S as corporate parent (Leiker, Jason) |
| Filing 6 ENTRY OF APPEARANCE by Jason S. Leiker on behalf of Haarslev, Inc. (Leiker, Jason) |
|
Filing 5
ORDER requiring Rule 7.1(a)(2) Disclosure Statements. Revised Rule 7.1(a)(2) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure requires that in "an action in which jurisdiction is based on diversity under 28 U.S.C. 1332(a), a party or intervenor must, unless the court orders otherwise, file a disclosure statement. The statement must name--and identify the citizenship of--every individual or entity whose citizenship is attributed to that party or intervenor: (A) when the action is filed in or removed to federal court...." Because the basis for jurisdiction in this case is diversity pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1332(a), on or before January 12, 2024, the parties are required to file disclosure statements that fully comply with Rule 7.1(a)(2), as amended. The Court notes that an LLC's citizenship is determined by that of its members. See Siloam Springs Hotel, L.L.C. v. Century Sur. Co., 781 F.3d 1233, 1234 (10th Cir. 2015). Each disclosure statement must identify the name and citizenship (not just the residence) of every individual or entity whose citizenship is attributed to that party. Signed by Magistrate Judge Rachel E. Schwartz on 1/3/2024. (This is a TEXT ENTRY ONLY. There is no.pdf document associated with this entry.)(jrh)
|
| Filing 4 MOTION to Dismiss for Lack of Personal Jurisdiction by Defendants JLM Management, LLC, Jeff Muir (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A - Johnson County Petition, #2 Exhibit B - JLM Management Idaho SOS, #3 Exhibit C - Affidavit of Jeff Muir, #4 Exhibit D - IME Idaho SOS)(Lewis, Diane) |
| Filing 3 DESIGNATION OF PLACE OF TRIAL filed by Defendants JLM Management, LLC, Jeff Muir - trial to be held in Kansas City. (Lewis, Diane) |
| Filing 2 CIVIL COVER SHEET by Defendants JLM Management, LLC, Jeff Muir. (Lewis, Diane) |
| Filing 1 NOTICE OF REMOVAL from District Court of Johnson County, Kansas, case number 23CV06259 Trial location of Kansas City ( Filing fee $405, Internet Payment Receipt Number AKSDC-6234442.), filed by JLM Management, LLC, Jeff Muir. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A, #2 Exhibit B)(Lewis, Diane) |
| NOTICE OF JUDGE ASSIGNMENT: Case assigned to District Judge Kathryn H. Vratil and Magistrate Judge Rachel E. Schwartz for all proceedings. (This is a TEXT ENTRY ONLY. There is no.pdf document associated with this entry.) NOTICE OF MAGISTRATE JUDGE AVAILABILITY: A United States magistrate judge is available to conduct all proceedings in this civil action if all parties voluntarily consent. Information & consent forms are available at http://www.uscourts.gov/forms/civil-forms/notice-consent-and-reference-civil-action-magistrate-judge (nac) |
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 Kansas 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.
