Fogle Enterprises, Inc. v. CiCi Enterprises, LP
| Fogle Enterprises, Inc. |
| CiCi Enterprises, LP |
| 6:2022cv03134 |
| May 23, 2022 |
| US District Court for the Western District of Missouri |
| M Douglas Harpool |
| David P Rush |
| Contract: Franchise |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1332 Diversity-Breach of Contract |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on October 6, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 12
ORDER granting #11 unopposed motion to extend time for response under Rule 6(b)(1)(B) of the federal rules of civil procedure. Plaintiff has up to and including July 22, 2022 to file its response. This is a TEXT ONLY ENTRY. No document is attached. (KBR)
|
| Filing 11 MOTION for extension of time to file response/reply as to #7 MOTION to dismiss case for forum non conveniens (Unopposed Motion to Extend Time for Response Under Rule 6(b)(1)(B) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure) filed by Jason C. Smith on behalf of Fogle Enterprises, Inc.. Suggestions in opposition/response due by 8/1/2022 unless otherwise directed by the court. (Related document(s) #7 ) (Smith, Jason) |
| Filing 10 NOTICE of appearance by Danielle Jean Reid on behalf of CiCi Enterprises, LP (Attorney Danielle Jean Reid added to party CiCi Enterprises, LP(pty:dft))(Reid, Danielle) |
| Filing 9 NOTICE of appearance by Bryan O. Wade on behalf of CiCi Enterprises, LP (Wade, Bryan) |
| Filing 8 SUGGESTIONS in support re #7 MOTION to dismiss case for forum non conveniens filed by Bryan O. Wade on behalf of Defendant CiCi Enterprises, LP. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A, #2 Exhibit B)(Related document(s) #7 ) (Wade, Bryan) |
| Filing 7 MOTION to dismiss case for forum non conveniens filed by Bryan O. Wade on behalf of CiCi Enterprises, LP. Suggestions in opposition/response due by 7/15/2022 unless otherwise directed by the court. (Attorney Bryan O. Wade added to party CiCi Enterprises, LP(pty:dft))(Wade, Bryan) |
| Filing 6 RETURN OF SERVICE of complaint executed by All Plaintiffs. CiCi Enterprises, LP served on 6/13/2022, answer due 7/5/2022. (Smith, Jason) |
|
Filing 5
ORDER granting #4 motion to appear pro hac vice entered by Clerk of Court. Attorney Sean Whyte for Fogle Enterprises, Inc. allowed to appear pro hac vice. This entry will serve as authorization for the pro hac participation by the attorney. Western District of Missouri Local Rule 5.1 requires documents to be filed electronically. If pro hac vice counsel has not already done so, counsel is directed to immediately register for a WDMO e-filing account for NextGen CM/ECF. This will enable counsel to electronically file documents and receive electronic notification of filings. Register for a WDMO e-filing account at #PACER. This is a TEXT ONLY ENTRY. No document is attached. (Warren, Melissa)
|
| Filing 4 Motion to allow Sean Whyte to appear pro hac vice (Pro Hac fee $100 receipt number AMOWDC-7964948) filed by Jason C. Smith on behalf of Fogle Enterprises, Inc.. (Smith, Jason) |
| SUMMONS ISSUED as to CiCi Enterprises, LP., and emailed to Plaintiff's counsel. (Keller, Jeanne) |
| Filing 3 NOTICE OF REASSIGNMENT from Magistrate Judge David P. Rush to District Judge M. Douglas Harpool. Magistrate Judge David P. Rush no longer associated with this case. Because Document #1 COMPLAINT references the filing of an injunction, this case was randomly reassigned to the Honorable M. Douglas Harpool for all further proceedings (Furtak, Rebecca) |
| Filing 2 NOTICE OF INCLUSION FOR MEDIATION AND ASSESSMENT PROGRAM (MAP). REVIEW NOTICE AND MAP GENERAL ORDER CAREFULLY FOR IMPORTANT CHANGES, DEADLINES AND REQUIREMENTS.Notice of MAP assignment to an outside mediator. (Attachments: #1 MAP General Order)(Furtak, Rebecca) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT against CiCi Enterprises, LP filed by Jason C. Smith on behalf of Fogle Enterprises, Inc.. Filing fee $402, receipt number AMOWDC-7942734. Service due by 8/22/2022 unless otherwise directed by the court. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A - Notice of Termination, #2 Exhibit B - Franchise Agreement, #3 Civil Cover Sheet Civil Cover Sheet)(Smith, Jason) |
| NOTICE OF MAGISTRATE JUDGE ASSIGNMENT as to Plaintiff: All parties must file the Notice Regarding Magistrate Judge Jurisdiction Form consenting to or opting out of the Magistrate Judge assignment. Click # here for instructions. Plaintiff's Form due by 6/13/2022 unless otherwise directed by the court. (Furtak, Rebecca) |
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
| Search for this case: Fogle Enterprises, Inc. v. CiCi Enterprises, LP | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Plaintiff: Fogle Enterprises, Inc. | |
| Represented By: | Derek Adam Ankrom |
| Represented By: | Jason C. Smith |
| Represented By: | Sean Whyte |
| 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 ] |
| Defendant: CiCi Enterprises, LP | |
| Represented By: | Bryan O. Wade |
| Represented By: | Danielle Jean Reid |
| 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.
