Nixon v. MPM Enterprises, Inc.
| Donald Nixon |
| MPM Enterprises, Inc. |
| 1:2018cv05862 |
| October 19, 2018 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of New York |
| Kiyo A Matsumoto |
| James Orenstein |
| Civil Rights: Americans with Disabilities - Other |
| 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on July 3, 2019. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 20 Mail Returned as Undeliverable: Docket Sheet returned. Postal Notation: Return to sender, refused, unable to send. (Tavarez, Jennifer) |
Filing 19
STIPULATION Of Dismissal: In accordance with Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1)(A)(ii), this action is hereby dismissed with prejudice and without costs or attorney's fees to any party as against the other. SO Ordered by Judge Kiyo A. Matsumoto on 6/27/2019. (Tavarez, Jennifer)
|
|
ORDER re #18 Stipulation of Dismissal -- In light of the parties' stipulation of dismissal, all scheduled conferences before me are canceled. Ordered by Magistrate Judge James Orenstein on 6/27/2019. (Roantree, Bronwyn)
|
| Filing 18 STIPULATION of Dismissal with Prejudice by MPM Enterprises, Inc. (Berger, Michael) |
|
ORDER granting #17 Motion to Adjourn Conference -- The motion is granted; the telephone conference previously scheduled for June 25, 2019, is rescheduled for July 9, 2019, at 12:30 p.m. I do not anticipate granting any further adjournments. Ordered by Magistrate Judge James Orenstein on 6/24/2019. (Roantree, Bronwyn)
|
| Filing 17 Second MOTION to Adjourn Conference Sine Die by MPM Enterprises, Inc.. (Lisi, Gregory) |
| Filing 16 Letter by MPM Enterprises, Inc. (Lisi, Gregory) |
|
ORDER re #16 Letter -- The request is granted; the telephone conference previously scheduled for June 4, 2019, is rescheduled for June 25, 2019, at 12:30 p.m. If a stipulation of dismissal is filed by June 21, 2019, I will cancel the conference; otherwise, counsel for the plaintiff shall initiate the call and conference in chambers when all parties are on the line. All parties are directed to use landlines rather than mobile telephones in order to reduce potential interference. Ordered by Magistrate Judge James Orenstein on 5/31/2019. (Gustafson, Kaelyn)
|
| Filing 15 First MOTION to Adjourn Conference Pending Settlement by MPM Enterprises, Inc.. (Berger, Michael) |
|
ORDER granting #15 Motion to Adjourn Conference -- The motion is granted; the settlement conference previously scheduled for April 30, 2019, is cancelled. I will hold a telephone conference on June 4, 2019, at 12:30 p.m. If a stipulation of dismissal is filed by May 31, 2019, I will cancel the conference; otherwise, counsel for the plaintiff shall initiate the call and conference in chambers when all parties are on the line. All parties are directed to use landlines rather than mobile telephones in order to reduce potential interference. Ordered by Magistrate Judge James Orenstein on 4/30/2019. (Roantree, Bronwyn)
|
|
ORDER granting #14 Motion to Appear by Telephone -- The motion is granted; the plaintiff may appear by telephone at the settlement conference scheduled for April 30, 2019, at 2:00 p.m. Ordered by Magistrate Judge James Orenstein on 4/25/2019. (Roantree, Bronwyn)
|
| Filing 14 MOTION to Appear by Telephone by Donald Nixon. (Shalom, Jonathan) |
| Filing 13 Minute Entry for proceedings held before Magistrate Judge James Orenstein:Initial Conference Hearing held on 3/14/2019. Scheduling: The next settlement conference will be held on April 30, 2019, at 2:00 p.m. Summary: I will defer setting a discovery schedule pending settlement negotiations. No later than April 26, 2019, each party must submit an ex parte statement of settlement position by email (NOT by ECF) to #orenstein_chambers@nyed.uscourts.gov. Each statement must include the terms on which the party is willing to settle the case, whether those terms are negotiable, and an explanation of that position. These statements will be treated as confidential, and will not be docketed. Meaningful settlement discussions will occur at the next conference; the plaintiff must appear in person and a representative of the defendant with full settlement authority must be present or immediately available by telephone. (Orenstein, James) |
| Filing 12 Proposed Scheduling Order Joint Proposed Discovery Plan by MPM Enterprises, Inc. (Berger, Michael) |
|
ORDER granting #11 Motion to Adjourn Conference -- The motion is granted; the initial conference previously scheduled for February 7, 2019, is rescheduled for March 14, 2019, at 9:30 a.m. Ordered by Magistrate Judge James Orenstein on 1/31/2019. (Roantree, Bronwyn)
|
| Filing 11 First MOTION to Adjourn Conference on Consent of the Parties by MPM Enterprises, Inc.. (Lisi, Gregory) |
|
SCHEDULING ORDER: Due to a conflict in the Court's calendar the initial discovery planning conference previously scheduled for February 5, 2019, is rescheduled for February 7, 2019, at 10:30 a.m. No later than February 5, 2019, the parties must submit, by means of electronic filing on the court's ECF (Electronic Case Filing) system, a joint proposed discovery plan, see docket entry #10 . Ordered by Magistrate Judge James Orenstein on 1/11/2019. (Guy, Alicia)
|
|
Filing 10
SCHEDULING ORDER: Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 16(a), I order the parties to appear for an initial discovery planning conference on, February 5, 2019, at 11:30 a.m. in Courtroom 11D South of the United States Courthouse, 225 Cadman Plaza East, Brooklyn, New York. No later than February 1, 2019, the parties must submit, by means of electronic filing on the court's ECF (Electronic Case Filing) system, a joint proposed discovery plan. Each party's counsel must be personally prepared to discuss all factual and legal issues in the case, including the possibility of settlement; otherwise, the client must attend in person as well. SEE ATTACHED ORDER. Ordered by Magistrate Judge James Orenstein on 1/7/2019. (Guy, Alicia) (Main Document 10 replaced on 1/7/2019) (Guy, Alicia).
|
| Filing 9 ANSWER to #1 Complaint, by MPM Enterprises, Inc.. (Lisi, Gregory) |
| Filing 8 Corporate Disclosure Statement by MPM Enterprises, Inc. (Lisi, Gregory) |
| Filing 7 Letter MOTION for Extension of Time to File Answer re #1 Complaint, And to So Order Stipulation by MPM Enterprises, Inc.. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit Stipulation Extending Time) (Lisi, Gregory) |
| Filing 6 NOTICE of Appearance by Michael Andrew Berger on behalf of MPM Enterprises, Inc. (aty to be noticed) (Berger, Michael) |
| Filing 5 NOTICE of Appearance by Gregory Scot Lisi on behalf of MPM Enterprises, Inc. (aty to be noticed) (Lisi, Gregory) |
|
ORDER granting #7 Motion for Extension of Time to Answer -- The motion is granted and the stipulation is so ordered; the defendant shall answer or otherwise respond to the complaint by December 21, 2018. Ordered by Magistrate Judge James Orenstein on 11/26/2018. (Roantree, Bronwyn)
|
| Filing 4 This attorney case opening filing has been checked for quality control. See the attachment for corrections that were made, if any. (Bowens, Priscilla) |
| Filing 3 In accordance with Rule 73 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and Local Rule 73.1, the parties are notified that if all parties consent a United States magistrate judge of this court is available to conduct all proceedings in this civil action including a (jury or nonjury) trial and to order the entry of a final judgment. Attached to the Notice is a blank copy of the consent form that should be filled out, signed and filed electronically only if all parties wish to consent. The form may also be accessed at the following link: #http://www.uscourts.gov/uscourts/FormsAndFees/Forms/AO085.pdf. You may withhold your consent without adverse substantive consequences. Do NOT return or file the consent unless all parties have signed the consent. (Bowens, Priscilla) |
| Filing 2 Summons Issued as to MPM Enterprises, Inc.. (Bowens, Priscilla) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT against Mpm Enterprises, Inc. filing fee $ 400, receipt number ANYEDC-10854493 Was the Disclosure Statement on Civil Cover Sheet completed -yes,, filed by DONALD NIXON. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet, #2 Proposed Summons) (Shalom, Jonathan) |
| Case assigned to Judge Kiyo A. Matsumoto and Magistrate Judge James Orenstein. Please download and review the Individual Practices of the assigned Judges, located on our #website. Attorneys are responsible for providing courtesy copies to judges where their Individual Practices require such. (Bowens, Priscilla) |
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 York Eastern 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: Nixon v. MPM Enterprises, Inc. | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Plaintiff: Donald Nixon | |
| Represented By: | Jonathan Shalom |
| 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: MPM Enterprises, Inc. | |
| Represented By: | Gregory Scot Lisi |
| Represented By: | Michael Andrew Berger |
| 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.
