Pirie v. LG Electronics Mobilecomm U.S.A., Inc. et al
| Fredrick Scott Pirie |
| LG Electronics, Inc. and LG Electronics Mobilecomm U.S.A., Inc. |
| 0:2021cv01936 |
| August 27, 2021 |
| US District Court for the District of Minnesota |
| Michael J Davis |
| John F Docherty |
| Tort Product Liability |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1332 |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on October 6, 2021. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 5
ORDER FOR PARTY TO FILE DOCUMENT/RESPOND TO COURT. Signed by Magistrate Judge John F. Docherty on 10/6/2021.(TJS)
|
| Filing 4 AFFIDAVIT of Service by Fredrick Scott Pirie (LG MobileComm) (Kress, Adam) |
| Filing 3 Summons Issued as to LG Electronics Mobilecomm U.S.A., Inc., LG Electronics, Inc. (MTP) |
| Filing 2 TEXT ONLY ENTRY: CLERK'S NOTICE OF INITIAL CASE ASSIGNMENT. Case assigned to Judge Michael J. Davis per Civil (3rd/4th Master) list, referred to Magistrate Judge John F. Docherty. Please use case number 21-cv-01936 MJD/JFD. (MTP) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT against LG Electronics Mobilecomm U.S.A., Inc., LG Electronics, Inc. (filing fee $ 402, receipt number AMNDC-8981581) filed by Fredrick Scott Pirie. Filer requests summons issued. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet, #2 FILED IN ERROR: Summons and Complaint, #3 FILED IN ERROR: Summons and Complaint) (Kress, Adam) Modified text on 8/27/2021 (MTP). |
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.
