Southern New Mexico Neurosurgery, LLC v. Hardin et al
Southern New Mexico Neurosurgery, LLC |
Hardin Technology Management, LLC, Blake Hardin and Hardin Technology, L.P. |
2:2019cv00465 |
May 20, 2019 |
US District Court for the District of New Mexico |
James O Browning |
Carmen E Garza |
Stephan M Vidmar |
Personal Inj. Prod. Liability |
28 U.S.C. § 1332 |
Plaintiff |
Docket Report
This docket was last retrieved on November 15, 2019. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
Document Text |
---|
Filing 27 Joint Status Report and Provisional Discovery Plan by Southern New Mexico Neurosurgery, LLC (Furth, Ben) |
Filing 26 MOTION TO DISMISS FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM by Southern New Mexico Neurosurgery, LLC. (Furth, Ben) |
Filing 25 ORDER by District Judge James O. Browning granting #22 Unopposed MOTION to Reset Rule 16 Scheduling Conference re #19 Scheduling Order filed by Southern New Mexico Neurosurgery, LLC. Rule 16(c) Hearing rescheduled for 8/7/2019 at 09:30 AM in Albuquerque - 460 Vermejo Courtroom. (meq) |
Filing 24 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE by Blake Hardin, Hardin Technology, L.P. First Set of Discovery Requests on Plaintiff (Shane, Michael) |
Filing 23 Corporate Disclosure Statement by Hardin Technology, L.P. (Shane, Michael) |
Filing 22 Unopposed MOTION to Reset Rule 16 Scheduling Conference re #19 Scheduling Order by Southern New Mexico Neurosurgery, LLC. (Furth, Ben) |
Filing 21 Corporate Disclosure Statement by Hardin Technology, L.P. (Shane, Michael) |
Filing 20 Corporate Disclosure Statement by Southern New Mexico Neurosurgery, LLC (Furth, Ben) |
Filing 19 INITIAL SCHEDULING ORDER by District Judge James O. Browning. Rule 16(c) Hearing set for 7/29/2019 at 09:00 AM in Albuquerque - 460 Vermejo Courtroom before District Judge James O. Browning. (bap) |
Filing 18 ORIGINAL ANSWER to Complaint SECOND AMENDED, COUNTERCLAIM AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES against Southern New Mexico Neurosurgery, LLC by Hardin Technology, L.P., Blake Hardin. Related document: #10 Amended Complaint, filed by Southern New Mexico Neurosurgery, LLC.(Shane, Michael) |
Filing 17 ORIGINAL ANSWER to Complaint SECOND AMENDED, COUNTERCLAIM AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES against Southern New Mexico Neurosurgery, LLC by Hardin Technology, L.P., Blake Hardin. Related document: #10 Amended Complaint, filed by Southern New Mexico Neurosurgery, LLC.(Shane, Michael) |
Filing 16 NOTICE REGARDING DOCUMENT ENTRIES: Because this case has been reassigned to a district judge, please be advised that any documents filed by the parties under Rule 73(b) have been permanently removed from the docket. Document(s) removed: Nos. 4 and 13. [THIS IS A TEXT-ONLY ENTRY. THERE ARE NO DOCUMENTS ATTACHED.] (bl) |
Filing 15 ORDER Vacating Rule 16 Scheduling Conference and #9 Initial Scheduling Order by Chief Magistrate Judge Carmen E. Garza. (ag) |
Filing 14 PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that this case has been reassigned to United States District Judge James O. Browning 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. United States Magistrate Judge Stephan M. Vidmar no longer assigned to this case.[THIS IS A TEXT-ONLY ENTRY. THERE ARE NO DOCUMENTS ATTACHED.] (jg) |
Filing 12 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE by Southern New Mexico Neurosurgery, LLC of Plaintiff's First Sets of Discovery on Defendants (Furth, Ben) |
Filing 11 NOTICE OF IMPENDING REASSIGNMENT: 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 this matter will be reassigned to a district judge as presiding judge if written consents from all parties have not been filed by July 1, 2019. The parties are free to withhold consent. If you have already entered your consent, you need not resubmit. (rh) |
Filing 10 AMENDED COMPLAINT against All Plaintiffs. adding Hardin Technology, L.P.. terminating Hardin Technology Management, LLC and Hardin Technology Management, LLC., filed by Southern New Mexico Neurosurgery, LLC. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit Exhibit 1, #2 Exhibit Exhibit 2, #3 Exhibit Exhibit 3, #4 Exhibit Exhibit 4, #5 Exhibit Exhibit 5, #6 Exhibit Exhibit 6, #7 Exhibit Exhibit 7, #8 Exhibit Exhibit 8)(Furth, Ben) |
Filing 9 INITIAL SCHEDULING ORDER by Chief Magistrate Judge Carmen E. Garza. Joint Status Report is due by 7/1/2019. A Telephonic Rule 16 Scheduling Conference is set for 7/9/2019 at 02:00 PM before Magistrate Judge Carmen E. Garza. [Parties shall call Judge Garza's AT&T Teleconference line at (877) 810-9415, follow the prompts, and enter the Access Code 7467959, to be connected to the proceedings.] Unless otherwise notified by the Clerk or the Court a notice of consent or non-consent for this case to proceed before the trial Magistrate Judge should be submitted by each party no later than 7/1/2019. (atc) |
Filing 8 NOTICE of Appearance by Michael J Shane on behalf of Blake Hardin, Hardin Technology Management, LLC (Shane, Michael) |
Filing 7 DEFENDANTS'/COUNTER-PLAINTIFFS' ANSWER to Complaint (FIRST AMENDED), COUNTERCLAIM & AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES against Southern New Mexico Neurosurgery, LLC by Hardin Technology Management, LLC, Blake Hardin. Related document: #6 Amended Complaint filed by Southern New Mexico Neurosurgery, LLC.(Shane, Michael) |
Filing 6 AMENDED COMPLAINT against All Plaintiffs., filed by Southern New Mexico Neurosurgery, LLC. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit 1, #2 Exhibit 2, #3 Exhibit 3, #4 Exhibit 4, #5 Exhibit 5, #6 Exhibit 6, #7 Exhibit 7)(Furth, Ben) |
Filing 5 MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER by Magistrate Judge Stephan M. Vidmar. Plaintiff is granted leave to amend its complaint no later than June 21, 2019. (am) |
Filing 3 APPENDIX/SUPPLEMENT re #1 Complaint, : Civil Cover Sheet by Southern New Mexico Neurosurgery, LLC (Furth, Ben) |
Filing 2 PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that this case has been randomly assigned to United States Magistrate Judge Stephan M. Vidmar 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.] (ln) |
Filing 1 COMPLAINT against All Plaintiffs ( Filing Fee - Online Payment), filed by Southern New Mexico Neurosurgery, LLC. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit 1, #2 Exhibit 2, #3 Exhibit 3, #4 Exhibit 4, #5 Exhibit 5, #6 Exhibit 6)(Furth, Ben) |
Filing and Administrative Fees Received: $ 400 receipt number 1084-6439027 re #1 Complaint, filed by Southern New Mexico Neurosurgery, LLC (Payment made via Pay.gov)(Furth, Ben) |
Summons Issued as to All Defendants. (ln) |
United States Magistrate Judge Stephan M. Vidmar and United States Magistrate Judge Carmen E. Garza assigned. (ln) |
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 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.