Certain London Underwriters Subscribing to Policy UMR No. B1526CSUSA1801301 v. Cactus Drilling Company, LLC et al
Plaintiff: Certain London Underwriters Subscribing to Policy UMR No. B1526CSUSA1801301
Defendant: Cactus Drilling Company, LLC, Express Energy Services Operating LP, Express Energy Services GP, LLC, Express Energy Holdings, LLC and Express Energy Services, LLC
Case Number: 1:2024cv00339
Filed: April 9, 2024
Court: US District Court for the District of New Mexico
Presiding Judge: Judith C Herrera
Referring Judge: Kevin R Sweazea
Nature of Suit: Contract: Other
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Petition for Removal- Declaratory Judgment
Jury Demanded By: None
Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on May 20, 2024. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
May 20, 2024 Filing 13 Acknowledgment of receipt received from the First Judicial District Court, County of Santa Fe re #11 Order on Motion to Remand to State Court. (arp) Modified text on 5/21/2024 (arp).
May 15, 2024 Filing 12 Letter to First Judicial District Court, County of Santa Fe re remanding case pursuant to #11 Stipulated Order of Remand. (arp)
May 15, 2024 Opinion or Order Filing 11 STIPULATED ORDER OF REMAND by District Judge Judith C. Herrera GRANTING #5 Motion to Remand to State Court. The case is hereby remanded to the First Judicial District Court for the State of New Mexico. Each party will bear its own costs and fees. (arp)
May 9, 2024 Filing 10 PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that this case has been reassigned to District Judge Judith C. Herrera as the trial judge. Under D.N.M.LR-Civ. 10.1, the first page of each document must have the case file number and initials of the assigned judges.Accordingly, further documents filed in this matter must bear the case number and the judges' initials shown in the case caption and the NEF for this document. Kindly reflect this change in your filings. Magistrate Judge Jennifer M. Rozzoni no longer assigned to this case.[THIS IS A TEXT-ONLY ENTRY. THERE ARE NO DOCUMENTS ATTACHED.] (eh)
May 6, 2024 Filing 9 RESPONSE to Motion re #5 MOTION to Remand to State Court filed by Cactus Drilling Company, LLC. (Davis, Jeffrey)
April 30, 2024 Filing 8 NOTICE OF CONSENT SUBMISSION DEADLINE: Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 73(b)(2), the parties are reminded that a magistrate judge was assigned as the trial judge in this matter under 28 U.S.C. 636(c). The parties are advised that the Clerk will reassign this matter to a district judge as the trial judge no later than 10 days from the entry of this notice unless consents from all parties have been filed. The parties are free to withhold consent. If you have already entered your consent, you need not resubmit. (ccp)[THIS IS A TEXT-ONLY ENTRY. THERE ARE NO DOCUMENTS ATTACHED.]
April 30, 2024 Opinion or Order Filing 7 ORDER FINDING GOOD CAUSE TO DELAY ENTRY OF A SCHEDULING ORDER: by Magistrate Judge Kevin R. Sweazea. Considering the pending motions seeking dispositive relief, the Court hereby finds good cause under Fed. R. Civ. P. 16 to delay holding a scheduling conference and entering a scheduling order. The Court will set the case for scheduling once the pending motions are resolved. [THIS IS A TEXT-ONLY ENTRY. NO DOCUMENTS ARE ATTACHED.] (atc)
April 30, 2024 Filing 6 RESPONSE in Opposition re #3 MOTION to Transfer Case and subject thereto, original answer filed by Certain London Underwriters Subscribing to Policy UMR No. B1526CSUSA1801301. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A) (Jones, Mary)
April 19, 2024 Filing 5 MOTION to Remand to State Court by Certain London Underwriters Subscribing to Policy UMR No. B1526CSUSA1801301. (Jones, Mary)
April 19, 2024 Filing 4 SUMMONS Returned Executed by Certain London Underwriters Subscribing to Policy UMR No. B1526CSUSA1801301. Express Energy Holdings, LLC served on 4/9/2024, answer due 4/30/2024. (Jones, Mary)
April 16, 2024 Filing 3 MOTION to Transfer Case and subject thereto, original answer by Cactus Drilling Company, LLC. (Davis, Jeffrey)
April 10, 2024 Filing 2 PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that this case has been randomly assigned to United States Magistrate Judge Jennifer M. Rozzoni to conduct dispositive proceedings in this matter, including motions and trial. Appeal from a judgment entered by a Magistrate Judge will be to the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit. It is the responsibility of the case filer to serve a copy of this Notice upon all parties with the summons and complaint. Consent is strictly voluntary, and a party is free to withhold consent without adverse consequences. Should a party choose to consent, notice should be made no later than 21 days after entry of the Order setting the Rule 16 Initial Scheduling Conference. For e-filers, visit our Web site at www.nmd.uscourts.gov for more information and instructions.[THIS IS A TEXT-ONLY ENTRY. THERE ARE NO DOCUMENTS ATTACHED.] (bc)
April 10, 2024 United States Magistrate Judge Jennifer M. Rozzoni and United States Magistrate Judge Kevin R. Sweazea assigned. (bc)
April 10, 2024 Filing and Administrative Fees Received: $ 405 receipt number BNMDC-9305231 re #1 Notice of Removal, filed by Cactus Drilling Company, LLC (Payment made via Pay.gov)(Davis, Jeffrey)
April 9, 2024 Filing 1 NOTICE OF REMOVAL by CACTUS DRILLING COMPANY, LLC Defendant from State of New Mexico County of Santa Fe First Judicial District, case number D-101-CV-2024-00500. ( Filing Fee - Online Payment), filed by CACTUS DRILLING COMPANY, LLC. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit Exhibit, #2 Civil Cover Sheet Civil Cover Sheet)(Davis, Jeffrey)

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 New Mexico District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Certain London Underwriters Subscribing to Policy UMR No. B1526CSUSA1801301 v. Cactus Drilling Company, LLC et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Certain London Underwriters Subscribing to Policy UMR No. B1526CSUSA1801301
Represented By: Mary E. Jones
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: Cactus Drilling Company, LLC
Represented By: Jeffrey Stewart Davis
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: Express Energy Services Operating LP
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: Express Energy Services GP, LLC
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: Express Energy Holdings, LLC
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: Express Energy Services, LLC
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.


Why Is My Information Online?