United States of America v. The Hinman Company
| United States of America |
| The Hinman Company |
| 1:2018cv01140 |
| October 4, 2018 |
| US District Court for the Western District of Michigan |
| Phillip J Green |
| Paul L Maloney |
| Other Statutory Actions |
| 49 U.S.C. ยง 1471 |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on November 14, 2018. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 11
ORDER granting #9 motion for extension of time to answer; deadline extended to 1/11/2019; absent extraordinary circumstances, further extensions will not be granted; signed by District Judge Paul L. Maloney (Judge Paul L. Maloney, acr)
|
| Filing 10 CERTIFICATE regarding compliance with LCivR 7.1(d) re UNOPPOSED MOTION for extension of time to file answer re #1 #9 filed by The Hinman Company (Dixon, Todd) |
| Filing 9 UNOPPOSED MOTION for extension of time to file answer re #1 by defendant The Hinman Company; (Attachments: #1 Proposed Order) (Dixon, Todd) |
| Filing 8 CORPORATE DISCLOSURE STATEMENT by The Hinman Company (Dixon, Todd) |
| (NON-DOCUMENT) ATTORNEY APPEARANCE of Jeffery Joseph Davis on behalf of defendant The Hinman Company (Davis, Jeffery) |
| (NON-DOCUMENT) ATTORNEY APPEARANCE of Andrew J. Hull on behalf of plaintiff United States of America (Hull, Andrew) |
|
Filing 7
ORDER granting #4 motion for extension of time to answer; deadline extended to 11/29/2018; signed by District Judge Paul L. Maloney (Judge Paul L. Maloney, acr)
|
| Filing 6 CERTIFICATE regarding compliance with LCivR 7.1(d) re UNOPPOSED MOTION for extension of time to file answer re #1 #4 filed by The Hinman Company (Dixon, Todd) |
|
Filing 5
ORDER regarding Motion for Extension of Time to File Answer #4 and certificate of concurrence; motion held in abeyance pending filing of certificate; signed by District Judge Paul L. Maloney (Judge Paul L. Maloney, acr)
|
| Filing 4 UNOPPOSED MOTION for extension of time to file answer re #1 by defendant The Hinman Company; (Attachments: #1 Proposed Order) (Dixon, Todd) |
| (NON-DOCUMENT) ATTORNEY APPEARANCE of Todd A. Dixon on behalf of defendant The Hinman Company (Dixon, Todd) |
| Filing 3 SUMMONS ISSUED as to defendant The Hinman Company (ns) |
| Filing 2 NOTICE that this case has been assigned Paul L. Maloney (ns) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT Complaint For Damages against The Hinman Company filed by United States of America (Attachments: #1 Summons) (Almassian, Carolyn) |
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 Western 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: United States of America v. The Hinman Company | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Defendant: The Hinman Company | |
| Represented By: | Jeffery Joseph Davis |
| Represented By: | Todd A. Dixon |
| 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 ] |
| Plaintiff: United States of America | |
| Represented By: | Carolyn Ann Almassian |
| Represented By: | Andrew J. Hull |
| 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.
