Ellis v. Pfizer Inc.
| Anthony Ellis |
| Pfizer Inc. |
| 1:2022cv11876 |
| November 7, 2022 |
| U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts |
| Richard G Stearns |
| Other Fraud |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1332 Diversity-Fraud |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on December 8, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 10 Judge Richard G. Stearns: ELECTRONIC ORDER entered granting #9 Pfizer's Assented-to Motion for Extension of Time until January 9, 2023, to respond to the Complaint. (Zierk, Marsha) |
| Filing 9 Assented to MOTION for Extension of Time to January 9, 2023 to time to respond to complaint by Pfizer Inc.. (Attachments: #1 Text of Proposed Order)(Wilson, Jessica) |
| Filing 8 Judge Richard G. Stearns: ELECTRONIC ORDER entered. re #7 Stipulation filed by Pfizer Inc. Treated as a motion and DENIED without prejudice to refiling. First, any request of the court must be filed as a motion, not a stipulation between the parties, in order for CM/ECF to recognize the pleading as a pending matter. Next, Pfizer fails to provide the court with any basis to support an alteration to the time to respond to a Complaint prescribed by the federal procedural rules. (Zierk, Marsha) |
| Filing 7 STIPULATION re #1 Complaint Joint Stipulation for Extension of Time to Respond to the Complaint by Pfizer Inc.. (Wilson, Jessica) |
| Filing 6 CORPORATE DISCLOSURE STATEMENT by Pfizer Inc.. (Wilson, Jessica) |
| Filing 5 NOTICE of Appearance by Jessica C. Wilson on behalf of Pfizer Inc. (Wilson, Jessica) |
| Filing 4 SUMMONS Returned Executed Pfizer Inc. served on 11/18/2022, answer due 12/9/2022. (Bliss, Paula) |
| Filing 3 Summons Issued as to Pfizer 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. (Phillips, Sophie) |
| Filing 2 ELECTRONIC NOTICE of Case Assignment. Judge Richard G. Stearns 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 Judith G. Dein. (Finn, Mary) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT against Pfizer Inc. Filing fee: $ 402, receipt number AMADC-9577034 (Fee Status: Filing Fee paid), filed by Anthony Ellis. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet, #2 Category Form)(Bliss, Paula) |
Access additional case information on PACER
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the U.S. 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
| Search for this case: Ellis v. Pfizer Inc. | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Plaintiff: Anthony Ellis | |
| Represented By: | Paula S. Bliss |
| 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: Pfizer Inc. | |
| Represented By: | Jessica C. Wilson |
| 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.
