Exosome Diagnostics, Inc. v. Eitan et al
Plaintiff: Exosome Diagnostics, Inc.
Defendant: Neurodex, Inc. and Erez Eitan
Case Number: 1:2018cv12495
Filed: December 3, 2018
Court: US District Court for the District of Massachusetts
Presiding Judge: Indira Talwani
Nature of Suit: Contract: Other
Jury Demanded By: Plaintiff
Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on January 9, 2019. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
January 9, 2019 Filing 19 Judge Indira Talwani: ELECTRONIC ORDER entered. The parties' #18 Joint Motion to Extend the Stay of Proceedings In Order to Finalize Settlement is ALLOWED in part. The parties shall file a join status report no later than February 7, 2019. (DaSilva, Carolina)
January 7, 2019 Filing 18 JOINT MOTION to Extend Stay and Status Report by Erez Eitan, Neurodex, Inc.. (Pardo, Christopher) Modified text, and event type on 1/8/2019 (DaSilva, Carolina).
January 3, 2019 Filing 17 Judge Indira Talwani: ELECTRONIC ORDER entered. The Parties' #16 Joint Motion to Briefly Extend the Stay of Proceedings Pending Settlement Discussions is ALLOWED. The Parties shall file a joint status report no later than January 7, 2019. (DaSilva, Carolina)
January 2, 2019 Filing 16 JOINT MOTION to Extend Stay until January 6, 2019 and Status Report by Erez Eitan, Neurodex, Inc.. (Pardo, Christopher) Modified text, and event type on 1/3/2019 (DaSilva, Carolina).
December 20, 2018 Filing 15 Judge Indira Talwani: ELECTRONIC ORDER entered. The Parties' #14 Joint Motion to Stay Proceedings Pending Settlement Discussions is ALLOWED. The Parties shall file a joint status report no later than January 2, 2019. (DaSilva, Carolina)
December 19, 2018 Filing 14 Joint MOTION to Stay Proceedings Pending Settlement Discussions by Erez Eitan, Neurodex, Inc..(Pardo, Christopher)
December 19, 2018 Filing 13 CORPORATE DISCLOSURE STATEMENT by Neurodex, Inc.. (Pardo, Christopher)
December 19, 2018 Filing 12 NOTICE of Appearance by Christopher M. Pardo on behalf of Erez Eitan, Neurodex, Inc. (Pardo, Christopher)
December 13, 2018 Filing 11 SUMMONS Returned Executed Erez Eitan served on 12/11/2018, answer due 1/2/2019. (Gershenson, Adam) Modified text and included service date on 12/14/2018 (DaSilva, Carolina).
December 13, 2018 Filing 10 SUMMONS Returned Executed Neurodex, Inc. served on 12/5/2018, answer due 12/26/2018. (Gershenson, Adam) Modified text and included service date on 12/14/2018 (DaSilva, Carolina).
December 4, 2018 Filing 7 MEMORANDUM in Support re #2 MOTION for Preliminary Injunction filed by Exosome Diagnostics, Inc.. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit, #2 Exhibit, #3 Exhibit, #4 Exhibit, #5 Exhibit)(Gershenson, Adam)
December 4, 2018 Filing 6 Judge Indira Talwani: ELECTRONIC ORDER entered ALLOWING #3 MOTION to Seal Complaint and Memorandum of Law and Declarations in Support of Motion for Preliminary Injunction. (DaSilva, Carolina)
December 4, 2018 Filing 5 Summons Issued as to Erez Eitan, Neurodex, Inc.. 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. (Coppola, Katelyn)
December 4, 2018 Filing 4 ELECTRONIC NOTICE of Case Assignment. Judge Indira Talwani 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 Magistrate Judge M. Page Kelley. (Finn, Mary)
December 3, 2018 Filing 3 MOTION to Seal Complaint and Memorandum of Law and Declarations in Support of Motion for Preliminary Injunction by Exosome Diagnostics, Inc..(Gershenson, Adam)
December 3, 2018 Filing 2 MOTION for Preliminary Injunction by Exosome Diagnostics, Inc..(Gershenson, Adam)
December 3, 2018 Filing 1 COMPLAINT against Erez Eitan, Neurodex, Inc. Filing fee: $ 400, receipt number 0101-7438079 (Fee Status: Filing Fee paid), filed by Exosome Diagnostics, Inc.. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet, #2 JS45)(Gershenson, Adam) (Additional attachment(s) added on 12/4/2018: #3 Exhibits) (Coppola, Katelyn). (Main Document 1 replaced on 12/4/2018) (Coppola, Katelyn). (Attachment 1 replaced on 12/4/2018) (Coppola, Katelyn). (Attachment 2 replaced on 12/4/2018) (Coppola, Katelyn). Modified on 12/4/2018 documents replaced due to still being in fillable format. Exhibits separated from complaint and added as attachment (Coppola, Katelyn). Modified party complaint against on 12/6/2018 (DaSilva, Carolina).

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 this case: Exosome Diagnostics, Inc. v. Eitan et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Exosome Diagnostics, Inc.
Represented By: Adam S. Gershenson
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: Neurodex, Inc.
Represented By: Christopher M. Pardo
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: Erez Eitan
Represented By: Christopher M. Pardo
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?