Brisebois v. DG Volo & Company (U.S) Inc. et al
| Michael Brisebois |
| DG Volo & Company (U.S) Inc. and David John Woloviec |
| 1:2021cv10311 |
| February 24, 2021 |
| US District Court for the District of Massachusetts |
| Nathaniel M Gorton |
| Labor: Other |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1332 |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on April 8, 2021. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 15 Set Deadlines: Status Report due by 9/30/2021 (Vieira, Leonardo) |
| Filing 14 Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton: ORDER entered re: #13 Motion to Stay. Motion ALLOWED; counsel are directed to submit a status report on September 30, 2021, and every 6 months thereafter. (Vieira, Leonardo) |
| Filing 13 Joint MOTION to Stay Litigation by Michael Brisebois.(Davis, John) |
| Filing 12 Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton: ELECTRONIC ORDER entered: ALLOWING #11 Motion for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply re #8 MOTION to Dismiss and Compel Arbitration Responses due by 5/20/2021 (Vieira, Leonardo) |
| Filing 11 Assented to MOTION for Extension of Time to 5/20/2021 to File Response/Reply to Defendants Motion to Dismiss and Compel Arbitration by Michael Brisebois.(Davis, John) |
| Filing 10 Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton: ELECTRONIC ORDER entered: ALLOWING #9 Motion for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice Added John Matthew Vrett. Attorneys admitted Pro Hac Vice must register for electronic filing if the attorney does not already have an ECF account in this district. To register go to the Court website at www.mad.uscourts.gov. Select Case Information, then Electronic Filing (CM/ECF) and go to the CM/ECF Registration Form. (Vieira, Leonardo) |
| Filing 9 MOTION for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice for admission of John Matthew Vrett Filing fee: $ 100, receipt number 0101-8678542 by DG Volo & Company (U.S) Inc., David John Woloviec.(Heffernan, Daniel) (Main Document 9 replaced on 3/15/2021) (Vieira, Leonardo). (Additional attachment(s) added on 3/15/2021: #1 Affidavit) (Vieira, Leonardo). |
| Filing 8 MOTION to Dismiss and Compel Arbitration by DG Volo & Company (U.S) Inc., David John Woloviec. (Attachments: #1 Brief In Support of Motion To Dismiss, #2 Affidavit Woloviec Declaration and Exhibits)(Heffernan, Daniel) |
| Filing 7 Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton: ELECTRONIC ORDER entered ALLOWING #6 Motion for Extension of Time (Vieira, Leonardo) |
| Filing 6 Joint MOTION for Extension of Time to 3/10/2021 to Respond to Plaintiff's Complaint by DG Volo & Company (U.S) Inc., David John Woloviec.(Heffernan, Daniel) |
| Filing 5 Certified Copy of Notice of Removal Provided to Defense Counsel by Email. (Jones, Sherry) |
| Filing 4 ELECTRONIC NOTICE of Case Assignment. Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton 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 Jennifer C. Boal. (Danieli, Chris) |
| Filing 3 Civil Cover Sheet & Category Sheet re #1 Notice of Removal by DG Volo & Company (U.S) Inc., David John Woloviec. (Heffernan, Daniel) |
| Filing 2 Notice of correction to docket made by Court staff. Correction: Emailed counsel and requested the filing of the civil cover and category sheets. (Jones, Sherry) |
| Filing 1 NOTICE OF REMOVAL by DG Volo & Company (U.S) Inc., David John Woloviec ( Filing fee: $ 402, receipt number 0101-8651714 Fee Status: Filing Fee paid) (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A)(Heffernan, Daniel) |
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.
