Ocean Network Express Pte. Ltd. v. Union Pacific Railroad Company
Ocean Network Express Pte. Ltd. |
Union Pacific Railroad Company |
8:2022cv00193 |
May 31, 2022 |
US District Court for the District of Nebraska |
Michael D Nelson |
Robert F Rossiter |
Contract: Other |
28 U.S.C. ยง 1332 Diversity-Contract Dispute |
None |
Docket Report
This docket was last retrieved on June 2, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
Document Text |
---|
Filing 4 CORPORATE DISCLOSURE STATEMENT pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 7.1 identifying Corporate Parent Ocean Network Express Holdings, Ltd., Corporate Parent Ocean Network Express Holdings, Ltd., Corporate Parent Mitsui O.S.K. Lines, Ltd., Corporate Parent Mitsui O.S.K. Lines, Ltd., Corporate Parent Nippon Yusen Kaisha, Corporate Parent Nippon Yusen Kaisha, Corporate Parent Kawasaki Kisen Kaisha, Ltd., Corporate Parent Kawasaki Kisen Kaisha, Ltd. for Ocean Network Express Pte. Ltd.. by Attorney Dan H. Ketcham on behalf of Plaintiffs Ocean Network Express Pte. Ltd., Ocean Network Express Holdings, Ltd., Ocean Network Express Holdings, Ltd., Mitsui O.S.K. Lines, Ltd., Mitsui O.S.K. Lines, Ltd., Nippon Yusen Kaisha, Nippon Yusen Kaisha, Kawasaki Kisen Kaisha, Ltd., Kawasaki Kisen Kaisha, Ltd..(Ketcham, Dan) |
Filing 3 TEXT NOTICE REGARDING CORPORATE DISCLOSURE STATEMENT by Deputy Clerk as to Plaintiff Ocean Network Express Pte. Ltd. Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 7.1, non-governmental corporate parties are required to file Corporate Disclosure Statements (Statements). The parties shall use the form Corporate Disclosure Statement, available on the Web site of the court at http://www.ned.uscourts.gov/forms/. If you have not filed your Statement, you must do so within 15 days of the date of this notice. If you have already filed your Statement in this case, you are reminded to file a Supplemental Statement within a reasonable time of any change in the information that the statement requires.(JES) |
Filing 2 TEXT NOTICE OF JUDGES ASSIGNED: Chief Judge Robert F. Rossiter, Jr. and Magistrate Judge Michael D. Nelson assigned. In accordance with 28 U.S.C. 636(c)(2), the parties are notified that, if all parties consent, a magistrate judge may conduct a civil action or proceeding, including a jury or nonjury trial, subject to the courts rules and policies governing the assignment of judges in civil cases. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 73; NEGenR 1.4. (JES) |
Filing 1 COMPLAINT against Union Pacific Railroad Company ( Filing fee $ 402, receipt number ANEDC-4645228), by Attorney Dan H. Ketcham on behalf of Ocean Network Express Pte. Ltd.(Ketcham, Dan) |
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 Nebraska 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: Ocean Network Express Pte. Ltd. v. Union Pacific Railroad Company | |
---|---|
Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
Plaintiff: Ocean Network Express Pte. Ltd. | |
Represented By: | Dan H. Ketcham |
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: Union Pacific Railroad Company | |
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.