Nock v. Boardroom, Inc. d/b/a Bottom Line Inc.
| Regina Nock |
| Boardroom, Inc. d/b/a Bottom Line Inc. |
| 2:2022cv11296 |
| June 10, 2022 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan |
| Bernard A Friedman |
| Elizabeth A Stafford |
| P.I.: Other |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on May 19, 2023. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 27
OPINION and ORDER DENYING #13 DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO DISMISS THE COMPLAINT. Signed by District Judge Bernard A. Friedman. (JCur)
|
|
Filing 26
NOTICE by All Plaintiffs Plaintiff's Notice of Supplemental Authority (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A - Batts v. Gannett Co., Case No. 4:22-cv-10685, ECF No. 28 (E.D. Mich. Mar. 30, 2023)) (Miller, E.)
|
|
Filing 25
NOTICE by Regina Nock Plaintiff's Notice of Supplemental Authority (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A - Briscoe v. NTVB Media Inc., Case No. 4:22-cv-10352, ECF No. 41 (E.D. Mich. Mar. 3, 2023)) (Miller, E.)
|
|
Filing 24
ORDER granting THE PARTIES' [21, 22] MOTIONS FOR LEAVE TO FILE SUPPLEMENTAL AUTHORITIES. Signed by District Judge Bernard A. Friedman. (JCur)
|
|
Filing 23
RESPONSE to #22 MOTION for Leave to File A Notice of Supplemental Authority filed by Regina Nock. (Attachments: #1 Index of Exhibits, #2 Exhibit 1 - Bozung v Christianbook, LLC, Case No. 1:22-cv-00304-HYJ-RSK (W.D. Mich.), Brief in Support of Defendant Christianbook, LLCs Motion to Dismiss First Amended Class Action Complaint, #3 Exhibit 2 - Bozung v Christianbook, LLC, First Amended Class Action Complaint Jury Trial Demanded, #4 Exhibit 3 - Bozung v Christianbook, LLC, Plaintiffs Motion for Relief from Judgment Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 59(e) & Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b) and for Leave to File Second Amended Complaint Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a) and Proposed Second Amended Complaint) (Miller, E.)
|
|
Filing 22
MOTION for Leave to File A Notice of Supplemental Authority by Boardroom, Inc. d/b/a Bottom Line Inc.. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit) (Bylsma, Jon)
|
|
Filing 21
MOTION for Leave to File a Notice of Supplemental Authority by All Plaintiffs. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit 1 - Notice of Supplemental Authority) (Miller, E.)
|
|
Filing 20
NOTICE by Regina Nock re #18 Order on Motion for Leave to File Plaintiff's Notice of Supplemental Authority (Attachments: #1 Exhibit 1A - Carter v. DTN Mgmt. Co.) (Miller, E.)
|
|
Filing 19
Notice of Determination of Motion Without Oral Argument re #13 MOTION to Dismiss Plaintiff's Complaint. (JCur)
|
|
Filing 18
ORDER granting #17 MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE SUPPLEMENTAL AUTHORITY. Signed by District Judge Bernard A. Friedman. (JCur)
|
|
Filing 17
MOTION for Leave to File A Notice of Supplemental Authority by Regina Nock. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit 1 Proposed Notice of Supplemental Authority and 1A - Carter v. DTN Mgmt. Co.) (Miller, E.)
|
|
Filing 16
REPLY to Response re #13 MOTION to Dismiss Plaintiff's Complaint (Corrected) filed by Boardroom, Inc. d/b/a Bottom Line Inc.. (Bylsma, Jon)
|
|
Filing 15
REPLY to Response re #13 MOTION to Dismiss Plaintiff's Complaint filed by Boardroom, Inc. d/b/a Bottom Line Inc.. (Bylsma, Jon)
|
|
Filing 14
RESPONSE to #13 MOTION to Dismiss Plaintiff's Complaint filed by Regina Nock. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A- Wheaton v. Apple Inc., Case No. 19-cv-02883, dkt. 51 (N.D. Cal. Sept. 20, 2019) (defendants reply in support of motion to dismiss)) (Miller, E.)
|
|
Filing 13
MOTION to Dismiss Plaintiff's Complaint by Boardroom, Inc. d/b/a Bottom Line Inc.. (Bylsma, Jon)
|
|
Filing 12
NOTICE of Appearance by Jon M. Bylsma on behalf of Boardroom, Inc. d/b/a Bottom Line Inc.. (Bylsma, Jon)
|
|
Filing 11
STIPULATED ORDER EXTENDING TIME FOR DEFENDANT TO ANSWER OR OTHERWISE RESPOND TO PLAINTIFF'S #1 COMPLAINT: (Response due by 11/2/2022). Signed by District Judge Bernard A. Friedman. (JCur)
|
|
Filing 10
NOTICE of Appearance by Frank S. Hedin on behalf of Regina Nock. (Hedin, Frank)
|
|
Filing 9
STIPULATED ORDER Extending Time for Defendant to Answer or Otherwise Respond to Plaintiff's #1 Complaint: (Response due by 10/3/2022). Signed by District Judge Bernard A. Friedman. (JCur)
|
|
Filing 8
STIPULATED ORDER Extending Time for Defendant to Answer or Otherwise Respond to Plaintiff's #1 Complaint. Response due by 9/16/2022 Signed by District Judge Bernard A. Friedman. (Villereal, Tara)
|
|
Filing 7
ATTORNEY APPEARANCE: Joseph I. Marchese appearing on behalf of Regina Nock (Marchese, Joseph)
|
|
Filing 6
CERTIFICATE of Service/Summons Returned Executed. Boardroom, Inc. d/b/a Bottom Line Inc. served on 6/23/2022, answer due 7/14/2022. (Miller, E.)
|
|
Filing 5
ATTORNEY APPEARANCE: Philip L. Fraietta appearing on behalf of Regina Nock (Fraietta, Philip)
|
|
Filing 4
ATTORNEY APPEARANCE: Gregory A. Mitchell appearing on behalf of Regina Nock (Mitchell, Gregory)
|
|
Filing 3
ATTORNEY APPEARANCE: Sharon S. Almonrode appearing on behalf of Regina Nock (Almonrode, Sharon)
|
|
Filing 2
SUMMONS Issued for *Boardroom, Inc. d/b/a Bottom Line Inc.* (NAhm)
|
|
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 (NAhm)
|
|
Filing 1
COMPLAINT filed by Regina Nock against Boardroom, Inc. d/b/a Bottom Line Inc. with Jury Demand. Plaintiff requests summons issued. Receipt No: AMIEDC-8943150 - Fee: $ 402. County of 1st Plaintiff: Oakland County - County Where Action Arose: Oakland County - County of 1st Defendant: Out of State. [Previously dismissed case: No] [Possible companion case(s): None] (Attachments: #1 Index of Exhibits, #2 Exhibit A-Bottom Line Mailing List, #3 Exhibit B-Privacy: Sales, Rentals of Videos, etc., House Legislative Analysis Section, H.B. No. 5331, Jan. 20, 1989, #4 Exhibit C-The Information Marketplace: Merging and Exchanging Consumer Data (Mar. 13, 2001), #5 Exhibit D-Webs Hot New Commodity: Privacy, WSJ (Feb. 28, 2011), #6 Exhibit E-Statement of FTC Commissioner Pamela Jones Harbour (Dec. 7, 2009), #7 Exhibit F-Martha C. White, Big Data Knows What Youre Doing Right Now, TIME.com (July 31, 2012), #8 Exhibit G-Natasha Singer, You for Sale: Mapping, and Sharing, the Consumer Genome, N.Y. Times (June 16, 2012), #9 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), #10 Exhibit I-Bipartisan Group of Lawmakers Query Data Brokers About Practices Involving Consumers Personal Information, Website of Senator Ed Markey (July 24, 2012), #11 Exhibit J-Prize Scams, Federal Trade Commission, #12 Exhibit K-Charles Duhigg, Bilking the Elderly, With a Corporate Assist, N.Y. Times, May 20, 2007, #13 Exhibit L-Fraud Against Seniors: Hearing before the Senate Special Committee on Aging (August 10, 2000), #14 Exhibit M-2014 TRUSTe US Consumer Confidence Privacy Report, TRUSTe, #15 Exhibit N-Joshua Brustein, Start-Ups Seek to Help Users Put a Price on Their Personal Data, N.Y. Times (Feb. 12, 2012), #16 Exhibit O-Tsai, Cranor, Acquisti, and Egelman, The Effect of Online Privacy Information on Purchasing Behavior, 22(2) Information Systems Research 254, 254 (2011), #17 Exhibit P-Hann, et al., The Value of Online Information Privacy: An Empirical Investigation (Oct. 2003), #18 Exhibit Q-Californias Reader Privacy Act Signed into Law, Electronic Frontier Foundation (Oct. 3, 2011)) (Miller, E.)
|
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
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.
