Langford v. Exactech U.S., Inc.
| Marvin Langford |
| Exactech U.S., Inc. |
| 1:2024cv06125 |
| September 3, 2024 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of New York |
| Brooklyn Office |
| Nicholas G Garaufis |
| Marcia M Henry |
| Personal Inj. Prod. Liability |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1441 Petition for Removal- Personal Injury |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on September 3, 2024. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 6 Clerk's Notice Re: Consent. A United States Magistrate Judge has been assigned to this case and is available to conduct all proceedings. In accordance with Rule 73 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Local Rule 73.1, the parties are notified that if all parties consent, the assigned Magistrate Judge is available to conduct all proceedings in this action including a (jury or nonjury) trial and to order the entry of a final judgment. Attached to this 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. Any party may withhold its consent without adverse substantive consequences. Do NOT return or file the consent unless all parties have signed the consent.The form may also be accessed at the following link: #https://img.nyed.uscourts.gov/files/forms/MJConsentForm.pdf (KD) |
| Filing 5 Case transferred in from District of California Eastern; Case Number 2:24-cv-02237. Original file certified copy of transfer order and docket sheet received. |
| Filing 4 MDL ORDER. CASE TRANSFERRED to the Eastern District of New York. Electronic Records Sent. CASE CLOSED. (Donati, J) [Transferred from California Eastern on 9/3/2024.] |
| Filing 3 CERTIFICATE of SERVICE by Exactech U.S., Inc. re #1 Notice of Removal. (Mitchell, Kendal) Modified on 8/23/2024 (Donati, J). [Transferred from California Eastern on 9/3/2024.] |
| Filing 2 CIVIL NEW CASE DOCUMENTS ISSUED; (Attachments: #1 Consent Form, #2 VDRP) (Nair, C) [Transferred from California Eastern on 9/3/2024.] |
| Filing 1 NOTICE of REMOVAL from San Joaquin County Superior Court, case number STK-CV-UPI-2024-8099 by Exactech U.S., Inc. (Filing fee $ 405, receipt number BCAEDC-11698323) (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet, #2 Declaration of Kendal C. Mitchell, #3 Notice of Interested Parties and Corporate Disclosure Statement) (Mitchell, Kendal) [Transferred from California Eastern on 9/3/2024.] |
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: Langford v. Exactech U.S., Inc. | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Plaintiff: Marvin Langford | |
| Represented By: | Michael Albert Kelly |
| 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: Exactech U.S., Inc. | |
| Represented By: | Kendal Cynthia Mitchell |
| 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.
