Nam et al v. Paolini et al
| Soonil Nam and Elizabeth Kim |
| Gabriella Paolini and Indiana Center for Advanced Medicine |
| 1:2011cv11320 |
| July 25, 2011 |
| US District Court for the District of Massachusetts |
| Boston Office |
| Norfolk |
| William G. Young |
| Other Fraud |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1332 |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on July 25, 2011. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 2 Summons Issued as to Indiana Center for Advanced Medicine, Gabriella Paolini. Counsel receiving this notice electronically should download this summons, complete one for each defendant and serve it in accordance with Fed.R.Civ.P. 4 and LR 4.1. Summons will be mailed to plaintiff(s) not receiving notice electronically for completion of service. (Flaherty, Elaine) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT against All Defendants Filing fee: $ 350, receipt number 0101-3511698 (Fee Status: Filing Fee paid), filed by Soonil Nam, elizabeth kim. (Attachments: # 1 Civil Cover Sheet Civil Action Cover Sheet)(Smith-Lee, Emily) (Attachment 1 replaced on 7/25/2011) (Paine, Matthew). |
| ELECTRONIC NOTICE of Case Assignment. Judge William G. Young assigned to case. If the trial Judge issues an Order of Reference of any matter in this case to a Magistrate Judge, the matter will be transmitted to Chief Magistrate Judge Judith G. Dein. (Abaid, Kimberly) |
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 Massachusetts 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.
