de Rothschild II v. Webster
| Amschel de Rothschild II |
| Jacques Webster, II and Travis Scott |
| 3:2022cv00077 |
| February 11, 2022 |
| US District Court for the Western District of Kentucky |
| Benjamin Beaton |
| Copyright |
| 17 U.S.C. ยง 101 Copyright Infringement |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on March 29, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 7
ORDER: For the reasons explained in the accompanying memorandum, the Court dismisses this case without prejudice under Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b) for failure to prosecute. cc: Plaintiff (pro se) (JM)
|
| Filing 6 MEMORANDUM: For the reasons explained in the accompanying memorandum, the Court dismisses this case, without prejudice, for failure to prosecute. cc: Plaintiff (pro se) (JM) |
| Filing 5 Mail Returned as Undeliverable re #4 . Mail sent to Amschel de Rothchild, II (JM) (Main Document 5 replaced on 2/24/2022) (JM). |
| Filing 4 NOTICE of Deficiency re #1 Complaint. Reason for Deficiency: Lack of signature. Failure to comply will be brought to the attention of the Court. Response due by 3/14/2022. (DeW) |
| Filing 3 MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis by Plaintiff Amschel de Rothschild II. (DeW) |
| Filing 2 Case Assignment (Random Selection): Case Assigned to Judge Benjamin Beaton. (DeW) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT against Jacques Webster, II, filed by Amschel de Rothschild II. (Attachments: #1 Summons TENDERED) (DeW) |
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 Kentucky Western 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.
