Sandbach v. Conopco, Inc. et al
| Jennifer Sandbach |
| Does 1 through 10 and Conopco, Inc. doing business as Unilever |
| 4:2021cv00709 |
| June 17, 2021 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri |
| Sarah E Pitlyk |
| John A Ross |
| Other Fraud |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1332 |
| Both |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on July 8, 2021. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 10 ANSWER to Complaint by Conopco, Inc..(Muehlberger, James) |
Filing 9
ORDER REASSIGNING CASE. Before the Court are two motions to transfer and coordinate pretrial proceedings. Docs. 35 , 37 . The Court previously granted a motion to consolidate eight cases with identical claims against Defendant Conopco, Inc. Doc. 13 . Since that order, Defendant has removed five cases filed by the same lawyer raising the same claims on behalf of new plaintiffs. Defendant requests, with consent of Plaintiffs counsel, that these actions be consolidated for pretrial purposes:1. Fischer v. Conopco, Inc., 4:21-cv-00582-JMB2. Muller v. Conopco, Inc., 4:21-cv-00583-SRW3. Sandbach v. Conopco, Inc., 4:21-cv-00706-DDN4. Sandbach v. Conopco, Inc., 4:21-cv-00709-JAR5. Huskey v. Conopco, Inc., 4:21-cv-00710-SRWFor the reasons articulated in the previous order to consolidate, Doc. 13 , the Court will grant the motions. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the motions to transfer and coordinate pretrial proceedings, Docs. 35 , 37 , are GRANTED. All pleading and other documents in this matter shall be filed in Crepps v. Conopco, Inc., 4:19-cv-02554-SEP. See E.D. Mo. L.R. 4.03. Signed by District Judge Sarah E. Pitlyk on 6/24/21. (ARL)
|
|
Filing 8
Docket Text ORDER: Re: #6 Consent MOTION for Extension of Time to File Answer by Defendant Conopco, Inc.. (Muehlberger, James) ; ORDERED GRANTED. Conopco, Inc. answer due 7/8/2021. Signed by District Judge John A. Ross on 6/23/21. (JAB)
|
| Filing 7 NOTICE by Defendant Conopco, Inc. of Motion to Transfer (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A- Motion to Transfer and Memorandum in Support)(Muehlberger, James) |
| Filing 6 Consent MOTION for Extension of Time to File Answer by Defendant Conopco, Inc.. (Muehlberger, James) |
| Filing 5 Petition (Removal/Transfer) Received From: Circuit Court, St. Louis County Missouri, filed by Jennifer Sandbach.(BAK) |
| Filing 4 NOTICE OF FILING NOTICE OF REMOVAL filed by Defendant Conopco, Inc. Sent To: State Court - Executed (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A - State Court Confirmation)(Muehlberger, James) |
| Filing 3 DISCLOSURE OF ORGANIZATIONAL INTERESTS CERTIFICATE by Defendant Conopco, Inc.. Parent companies: Conopco, Inc., d/b/a "Unilever" states that it is wholly owned by Unilever United States, Inc., Subsidiaries: Unilever Trumbull Research Services, Inc., Ben & Jerry's Homemade, Inc., Sundial Brands, LLC., Publicly held company: Unilever United States, Inc. is owned, indirectly, by Unilever PLC, which is publicly traded. Unilever PLC does not have parent corporation.,. (Muehlberger, James) |
| Filing 2 NOTICE OF FILING NOTICE OF REMOVAL filed by Defendant Conopco, Inc. Sent To: Plaintiff (Muehlberger, James) |
| Filing 1 NOTICE OF REMOVAL with receipt number AMOEDC-8706934, in the amount of $402 Jury Demand,, filed by Conopco, Inc.. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A - State Compliant, #2 Exhibit B - State Court File, #3 Original Filing Form, #4 Civil Cover Sheet)(Muehlberger, James) |
| Case Opening Notification: Judge Assigned: U.S. District Judge John A. Ross. (BAK) |
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 Missouri 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.
