Lilly v. Sandviks, Inc,
Teagan Lilly |
Sandviks, Inc, |
2:2022cv11104 |
May 20, 2022 |
US District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan |
Kimberly G Altman |
Terrence G Berg |
P.I.: Other |
Plaintiff |
Docket Report
This docket was last retrieved on October 11, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
Document Text |
---|
Filing 11 STIPULATION AND ORDER to Extend Time to Respond re #1 Complaint, filed by Teagan Lilly. Response due by 9/16/2022 Signed by District Judge Terrence G. Berg. (AChu) |
Filing 10 STIPULATION AND ORDER to Extend Time to Respond re #1 Complaint, filed by Teagan Lilly. Response due by 7/18/2022 Signed by District Judge Terrence G. Berg. (AChu) |
TEXT-ONLY ORDER Striking #9 Stipulation filed by Sandviks, Inc. Parties are directed to submit the stipulation and proposed order in one Word document via the Proposed Orders link in CM/ECF. Parties should not file their own stipulation on the docket. See, R11 of the Electronic Filing Policies and Procedures for the EDMI, available as an Appendix to this District's Local Rules. Issued by District Judge Terrence G. Berg. (AChu) |
Filing 9 [STRICKEN] STIPULATION EXTENDING TIME FOR DEFENDANT SANDVIKS, INC. TO RESPOND TO PLAINTIFFS COMPLAINT by Sandviks, Inc, (Brady, Michael) Modified on 6/27/2022 (AChu). |
Filing 8 NOTICE of Appearance by Michael G. Brady on behalf of Sandviks, Inc,. (Brady, Michael) |
Filing 7 NOTICE of Appearance by Philip L. Fraietta on behalf of Teagan Lilly. (Fraietta, Philip) |
Filing 6 CERTIFICATE of Service/Summons Returned Executed. Sandviks, Inc, served on 5/26/2022, answer due 6/16/2022. (Miller, E.) |
Filing 5 NOTICE of Appearance by Frank S. Hedin on behalf of Teagan Lilly. (Hedin, Frank) |
Filing 4 ATTORNEY APPEARANCE: Gregory A. Mitchell appearing on behalf of Teagan Lilly (Mitchell, Gregory) |
Filing 3 ATTORNEY APPEARANCE: Sharon S. Almonrode appearing on behalf of Teagan Lilly (Almonrode, Sharon) |
Filing 2 SUMMONS Issued for *Sandviks, Inc,* (LHos) |
Filing 1 COMPLAINT filed by Teagan Lilly against Sandviks, Inc, with Jury Demand. Plaintiff requests summons issued. Receipt No: AMIEDC-8919541 - Fee: $ 402. County of 1st Plaintiff: Wayne County - County Where Action Arose: Wayne County - County of 1st Defendant: Out of State. [Previously dismissed case: No] [Possible companion case(s): None] (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A-Early Moments Book Club Enhanced Masterfile Mailing List, #2 Exhibit B- Privacy: Sales, Rentals of Videos, etc., House Legislative Analysis Section, H.B. No. 5331, Jan. 20, 1989, #3 Exhibit C- The Information Marketplace: Merging and Exchanging Consumer Data (Mar. 13, 2001), #4 Exhibit D- Webs Hot New Commodity: Privacy, WSJ (Feb. 28, 2011), #5 Exhibit E- Statement of FTC Commissioner Pamela Jones Harbour (Dec. 7, 2009), #6 Exhibit F- Martha C. White, Big Data Knows What Youre Doing Right Now, TIME.com (July 31, 2012), #7 Exhibit G- Natasha Singer, You for Sale: Mapping, and Sharing, the Consumer Genome, N.Y. Times (June 16, 2012), #8 Exhibit H- Letter from Senator John D. Rockefeller IV, Chairman, Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation, to Scott E. Howe, Chief Executive Officer, Acxiom (Oct. 9, 2012), #9 Exhibit I- Bipartisan Group of Lawmakers Query Data Brokers About Practices Involving Consumers Personal Information, Website of Senator Ed Markey (July 24, 2012), #10 Exhibit J- Prize Scams, Federal Trade Commission, #11 Exhibit K- Charles Duhigg, Bilking the Elderly, With a Corporate Assist, N.Y. Times, May 20, 2007, #12 Exhibit L- Fraud Against Seniors: Hearing before the Senate Special Committee on Aging (August 10, 2000), #13 Exhibit M- 2014 TRUSTe US Consumer Confidence Privacy Report, TRUSTe, #14 Exhibit N- Joshua Brustein, Start-Ups Seek to Help Users Put a Price on Their Personal Data, N.Y. Times (Feb. 12, 2012), #15 Exhibit O- Tsai, Cranor, Acquisti, and Egelman, The Effect of Online Privacy Information on Purchasing Behavior, 22(2) Information Systems Research 254, 254 (2011), #16 Exhibit P- Hann, et al., The Value of Online Information Privacy: An Empirical Investigation (Oct. 2003), #17 Exhibit Q- Californias Reader Privacy Act Signed into Law, Electronic Frontier Foundation (Oct. 3, 2011)) (Miller, E.) |
A United States Magistrate Judge of this Court is available to conduct all proceedings in this civil action in accordance with 28 U.S.C. 636c and FRCP 73. The Notice, Consent, and Reference of a Civil Action to a Magistrate Judge form is available for download at #http://www.mied.uscourts.gov (LHos) |
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 Michigan Eastern 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: Lilly v. Sandviks, Inc, | |
---|---|
Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
Plaintiff: Teagan Lilly | |
Represented By: | E. Powell Miller |
Represented By: | Frank S. Hedin |
Represented By: | Gregory A. Mitchell |
Represented By: | Philip L. Fraietta |
Represented By: | Sharon S. Almonrode |
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: Sandviks, Inc, | |
Represented By: | Michael G. Brady |
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.