Kamal et al v. Baker Tilly Virchow Krause, LLC et al
| Samuel Edison and K. Tausif Kamal |
| Baker Tilly Virchow Krause, LLC, Deloitte, LLP and Baker Tilly US, LLP |
| 0:2021cv01549 |
| July 1, 2021 |
| US District Court for the District of Minnesota |
| Michael J Davis |
| David T Schultz |
| P.I.: Other |
| 28 U.S.C. § 1332 |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on March 27, 2024. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 26
ORDER on #19 Stipulation. Baker Tilly US, LLP answer due 9/10/2021; Baker Tilly Virchow Krause, LLC answer due 9/10/2021; Deloitte, LLP answer due 9/10/2021. Signed by Magistrate Judge David T. Schultz on 7/30/2021. (TJB)
|
|
Filing 25
TEXT ONLY ENTRY: ORDER granting #22 Motion for Admission Pro Hac Vice of Attorney Stanley J Parzen for Baker Tilly US, LLP; granting #23 Motion for Admission Pro Hac Vice of Attorney Greg Deis for Baker Tilly US, LLP. Approved by Magistrate Judge David T. Schultz on 7/30/2021. (NAH)
|
| Filing 24 NOTICE of Voluntary Dismissal by All Plaintiffs (Centner, Daniel) |
| Filing 23 MOTION for Admission Pro Hac Vice for Attorney John Gregory Deis. Filing fee $ 100, receipt number AMNDC-8914002 filed by Baker Tilly US, LLP. (Rowe, Michael) |
| Filing 22 MOTION for Admission Pro Hac Vice for Attorney Stanley J. Parzen. Filing fee $ 100, receipt number AMNDC-8913908 filed by Baker Tilly US, LLP. (Rowe, Michael) |
|
Filing 21
TEXT ONLY ENTRY: ORDER granting #15 Motion for Admission Pro Hac Vice of Attorney Timothy Hoeffner for Deloitte, LLP; granting #16 Motion for Admission Pro Hac Vice of Attorney Xenia Nicole Figueroa for Deloitte, LLP. Approved by Magistrate Judge David T. Schultz on 7/27/2021. (NAH)
|
| Filing 20 PROPOSED ORDER TO JUDGE re #19 Stipulation. (Zhao, X.) |
| Filing 19 STIPULATION for Extension of Time to Respond and Proposed Briefing Schedule by Deloitte, LLP. Jointly Signed by K. Tausif Kamal, Samuel Edison, and Baker Tilly US LLP. (Zhao, X.) |
| Filing 18 NOTICE of Appearance by Jaime Stilson on behalf of Baker Tilly US, LLP. (Stilson, Jaime) |
| Filing 17 NOTICE of Appearance by Michael E Rowe on behalf of Baker Tilly US, LLP. (Rowe, Michael) |
| Filing 16 MOTION for Admission Pro Hac Vice for Attorney NIcole Figueroa. Filing fee $ 100, receipt number AMNDC-8903749 filed by Deloitte, LLP. (Zhao, X.) |
| Filing 15 MOTION for Admission Pro Hac Vice for Attorney Timothy E. Hoeffner. Filing fee $ 100, receipt number AMNDC-8903730 filed by Deloitte, LLP. (Zhao, X.) |
| Filing 14 NOTICE of Appearance by X. Kevin Zhao on behalf of Deloitte, LLP. (Zhao, X.) |
| Filing 13 NOTICE of Appearance by Mark L. Johnson on behalf of Deloitte, LLP. (Johnson, Mark) |
| Filing 12 NOTICE of Appearance by Lawrence M. Shapiro on behalf of Deloitte, LLP. (Shapiro, Lawrence) |
|
Filing 11
TEXT ONLY ENTRY: ORDER granting #5 Motion for Admission Pro Hac Vice of Attorney Grace Arden Hancock for Samuel Edison and for K. Tausif Kamal; granting #6 Motion for Admission Pro Hac Vice of Attorney Daniel Centner for Samuel Edison and for K. Tausif Kamal; granting #10 Motion for Admission Pro Hac Vice of Attorney Joseph C. Peiffer for Samuel Edison and for K. Tausif Kamal. Approved by Magistrate Judge David T. Schultz on 7/14/2021. (NAH)
|
| Filing 10 MOTION for Admission Pro Hac Vice for Attorney Joseph Peiffer. Filing fee $ 100, receipt number AMNDC-8876228 filed by Samuel Edison, K. Tausif Kamal. (Blanchfield, Garrett) |
| Filing 9 SUMMONS Returned Executed by K. Tausif Kamal, Samuel Edison. Deloitte, LLP served on 7/6/2021, answer due 7/27/2021. (Blanchfield, Garrett) |
| Filing 8 SUMMONS Returned Executed by K. Tausif Kamal, Samuel Edison. Baker Tilly US, LLP served on 7/6/2021, answer due 7/27/2021. (Blanchfield, Garrett) |
| Filing 7 SUMMONS Returned Executed by K. Tausif Kamal, Samuel Edison. Baker Tilly Virchow Krause, LLC served on 7/6/2021, answer due 7/27/2021. (Blanchfield, Garrett) |
| Filing 6 MOTION for Admission Pro Hac Vice for Attorney Daniel B. Centner. Filing fee $ 100, receipt number AMNDC-8870280 filed by Samuel Edison, K. Tausif Kamal. (Blanchfield, Garrett) |
| Filing 5 MOTION for Admission Pro Hac Vice for Attorney Grace A. Hancock. Filing fee $ 100, receipt number AMNDC-8870252 filed by Samuel Edison, K. Tausif Kamal. (Blanchfield, Garrett) |
| Filing 4 (Text-Only): Notice re: Non-Admitted AttorneyWe have received documents listing Joseph Peiffer, Daniel B. Centner, Grace A. Hancock as counsel of record. If he or she wishes to be listed as an attorney of record in this case, he or she must be admitted to the bar of the U.S. District Court of Minnesota in accordance with #Local Rule 83.5 (a), (b) and (c) or temporarily admitted pro hac vice in accordance with #Local Rule 83.5 (d) or (e).For more admissions information and forms, please see the Attorney Forms Section of the courts website at #www.mnd.uscourts.gov/forms/all-forms#. (MMP) |
| Filing 3 Summons Issued as to Baker Tilly US, LLP, Baker Tilly Virchow Krause, LLC, Deloitte, LLP. (MMP) |
| Filing 2 TEXT ONLY ENTRY: CLERK'S NOTICE OF INITIAL CASE ASSIGNMENT. Case assigned to Judge Michael J. Davis per 3rd 4th Master list, referred to Magistrate Judge David T. Schultz. Please use case number 21-cv-1549 (MJD/DTS). (MMP) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT Class Action Complaint against Baker Tilly US, LLP, Baker Tilly Virchow Krause, LLC, Deloitte, LLP (filing fee $ 402, receipt number AMNDC-8858396) filed by K. Tausif Kamal, Samuel Edison. Filer requests summons issued. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet) (Blanchfield, Garrett) |
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 Minnesota 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.
