Schloegel v. Edgewell Personal Care Company et al
| Shannon Schloegel |
| Edgewell Personal Care Company and Edgewell Personal Care Brands, LLC |
| 4:2021cv00631 |
| September 1, 2021 |
| US District Court for the Western District of Missouri |
| Greg Kays |
| Other Fraud |
| 28 U.S.C. § 1332 |
| Both |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on March 16, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 18 REPLY SUGGESTIONS to motion re #10 MOTION to dismiss case /Plaintiff's Class Action Complaint filed by Megan A. McCurdy on behalf of Defendants Edgewell Personal Care Brands, LLC, Edgewell Personal Care Company. (Related document(s) #10 ) (McCurdy, Megan) |
| Filing 17 SUGGESTIONS in opposition re #10 MOTION to dismiss case /Plaintiff's Class Action Complaint filed by Sean Cooper on behalf of Plaintiff Shannon Schloegel. Reply suggestions due by 10/29/2021 unless otherwise directed by the court. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A)(Related document(s) #10 ) (Cooper, Sean) |
Filing 16
ORDER granting #14 motion for extension of time to file response/reply. Plaintiff's suggestions in opposition/response due by 10/15/2021 unless otherwise directed by the court. Signed on 10/7/21 by District Judge Greg Kays. This is a TEXT ONLY ENTRY. No document is attached. (Law Clerk)
|
|
Filing 15
RULE 16 NOTICE. Rule 26 conference due by 11/8/2021. Proposed scheduling order due by 11/22/2021. Signed on 10/7/21 by District Judge Greg Kays. (Strodtman, Tracy)
|
| Filing 14 Consent MOTION for extension of time to file response/reply as to #10 MOTION to dismiss case /Plaintiff's Class Action Complaint filed by Sean Cooper on behalf of Shannon Schloegel. Suggestions in opposition/response due by 10/20/2021 unless otherwise directed by the court. (Related document(s) #10 ) (Cooper, Sean) |
|
Filing 13
ORDER granting #12 motion for extension of time to file response to Defendant's motion #10 to dismiss and to exceed page limits. Plaintiff's suggestions in opposition shall not exceed twenty-five (25) pages. Plaintiff's suggestions in opposition are due by 10/8/2021 unless otherwise directed by the court. Signed on 9/18/21 by District Judge Greg Kays. This is a TEXT ONLY ENTRY. No document is attached. (Law Clerk)
|
| Filing 12 Consent MOTION for extension of time to file response/reply as to #11 Suggestions in Support of Motion, and to Exceed Page Limits filed by Sean Cooper on behalf of Shannon Schloegel. Suggestions in opposition/response due by 10/1/2021 unless otherwise directed by the court. (Attachments: #1 Proposed Order)(Related document(s) #11 ) (Cooper, Sean) |
| Filing 11 SUGGESTIONS in support re #10 MOTION to dismiss case /Plaintiff's Class Action Complaint filed by John W. Moticka on behalf of Defendants Edgewell Personal Care Brands, LLC, Edgewell Personal Care Company. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A - McCurdy Declaration, #2 Exhibit B - Tobias Declaration)(Related document(s) #10 ) (Moticka, John) |
| Filing 10 MOTION to dismiss case /Plaintiff's Class Action Complaint filed by John W. Moticka on behalf of Edgewell Personal Care Brands, LLC, Edgewell Personal Care Company. Suggestions in opposition/response due by 9/22/2021 unless otherwise directed by the court. (Moticka, John) |
|
Filing 9
ORDER granting #8 motion for leave to file excess pages. Defendants are allowed up to twenty-five pages of suggestions in support of their motion to dismiss. Signed on September 8, 2021 by District Judge Greg Kays. This is a TEXT ONLY ENTRY. No document is attached. (Law Clerk)
|
| Filing 8 Consent MOTION for leave to file excess pages filed by John W. Moticka on behalf of Edgewell Personal Care Brands, LLC, Edgewell Personal Care Company. Suggestions in opposition/response due by 9/22/2021 unless otherwise directed by the court. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit Suggestions in Support of Motion to Dismiss)(Moticka, John) |
| Filing 7 DISCLOSURE OF CORPORATE INTERESTS filed by Megan A. McCurdy on behalf of Defendant Edgewell Personal Care Company.(McCurdy, Megan) |
| Filing 6 DISCLOSURE OF CORPORATE INTERESTS filed by Megan A. McCurdy on behalf of Defendant Edgewell Personal Care Brands, LLC.(McCurdy, Megan) |
| Filing 5 NOTICE OF INCLUSION FOR MEDIATION AND ASSESSMENT PROGRAM (MAP). REVIEW NOTICE AND MAP GENERAL ORDER CAREFULLY FOR DEADLINES AND REQUIREMENTS.Notice of MAP assignment to Program Director. (Attachments: #1 MAP General Order)(Woods, Gloria) |
| Filing 4 NOTICE of appearance by Ashley Marie Crisafulli on behalf of All Defendants (Attorney Ashley Marie Crisafulli added to party Edgewell Personal Care Brands, LLC(pty:dft), Attorney Ashley Marie Crisafulli added to party Edgewell Personal Care Company(pty:dft))(Crisafulli, Ashley) |
| Filing 3 NOTICE of appearance by John W. Moticka on behalf of All Defendants (Attorney John W. Moticka added to party Edgewell Personal Care Brands, LLC(pty:dft), Attorney John W. Moticka added to party Edgewell Personal Care Company(pty:dft))(Moticka, John) |
| Filing 2 NOTICE of filing to Plaintiff of Notice of Removal by Edgewell Personal Care Brands, LLC, Edgewell Personal Care Company re #1 Notice of Removal, (McCurdy, Megan) |
| Filing 1 NOTICE OF REMOVAL from Circuit Court of Jackson County Circuit Court County, case number 2116-CV15843, filed by Megan A. McCurdy. Filing fee $402, receipt number AMOWDC-7563641. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit 1 - State Court File, #2 Exhibit 2 - Austin Declaration, #3 Exhibit 3 - Tobias Declaration, #4 Civil Cover Sheet)(McCurdy, Megan) |
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 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
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.
