Kulkarni v. Actavis Generics et al
Plaintiff: Nivedita T. Kulkarni
Defendant: Actavis Generics, Actavis Laboratories UT, Inc., Actavis Laboratories FL, Inc., Teva North America and Teva Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd.
Case Number: 1:2022cv05735
Filed: July 5, 2022
Court: U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York
Presiding Judge: Paul A Engelmayer
Referring Judge: Barbara C Moses
Nature of Suit: Personal Injury: Health Care/Pharmaceutical Personal Injury Product Liability
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 1332 pl Diversity-Product Liability
Jury Demanded By: Plaintiff
Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on September 27, 2023. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
August 29, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 7 INFORMATION PACKAGE MAILED to Nivedita T. Kulkarni, at 306 W. 21st Street, Apt. 13, New York, NY 10011, on 8/29/2022 Re: #5 Order of Service. The following document(s) were enclosed in the Service Package: a copy of the order of service or order to answer and other orders entered to date, the individual practices of the district judge and magistrate judge assigned to your case, Instructions for Litigants Who Do Not Have Attorneys, Notice Regarding Privacy and Public Access to Electronic Case Files, a flyer about the free legal assistance clinic located in the Thurgood Marshall Courthouse (only in non prisoner cases), a Motions guide, a notice that the Pro Se Manual has been discontinued, a Notice of Change of Address form to use if your contact information changes, a handout explaining matters handled by magistrate judges and consent form to complete if all parties agree to proceed for all purposes before the magistrate judge, a form for you to complete if you consent to receive filings electronically (only in nonprisoner cases), one or more summonses (only if you have paid the fee in person or if the judge has ordered that a summons be issued to you) - 5 Summons(es) mailed. (sha)
August 29, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 6 SUMMONS ISSUED as to Actavis Generics, Actavis Laboratories UT, Inc., Actavis Laboratories FL, Inc., Teva North America, Teva Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd.. (sha)
August 29, 2022 Opinion or Order Mailed a Notice of Case Reassignment to Nivedita T. Kulkarni 306 W. 21st Street Apt. 13 New York, NY 10011..(aea)
August 26, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 5 ORDER OF SERVICE: Plaintiff, who is proceeding pro se, paid the filing fees to commence this action. The Clerk of Court is directed to issue summonses as to Defendants Actavis Generics, Actavis Laboratories UT, Inc., Actavis Laboratories FL, Inc., Teva North America, and Teva Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd. Plaintiff is directed to serve the summons and complaint on each Defendant within 90 days of the issuance of the summonses. If within those 90 days, Plaintiff has not either served Defendants or requested an extension of time to do so, the Court may dismiss the claims against Defendants under Rules 4 and 41 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure for failure to prosecute. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Magistrate Judge Barbara C. Moses on 8/26/2022) (kv) Transmission to Pro Se Assistants for processing.
August 23, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 3 ORDER REGARDING GENERAL PRETRIAL MANAGEMENT: The above-referenced action has been referred to Magistrate Judge Barbara Moses for general pretrial management, including scheduling, discovery, non-dispositive pretrial motions, and settlement, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 636(b)(1)(A). All pretrial motions and applications, including those related to scheduling and discovery (but excluding motions to dismiss or for judgment on the pleadings, for injunctive relief, for summary judgment, or for class certification under Fed. R. Civ. P. 23) must be made to Judge Moses and in compliance with this Court's Individual Practices in Civil Cases, available on the Court's website at https://nysd.uscourts.gov/hon-barbara-moses. Parties and counsel are cautioned: Once a discovery schedule has been issued, all discovery must be initiated in time to be concluded by the close of discovery set by the Court and further set forth in this Order. (Signed by Magistrate Judge Barbara C. Moses on 8/23/2022) (rro)
August 22, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 2 ORDER REFERRING CASE TO MAGISTRATE JUDGE. Order that case be referred to the Clerk of Court for assignment to a Magistrate Judge for General Pretrial (includes scheduling, discovery, non-dispositive pretrial motions, and settlement). Referred to Magistrate Judge Barbara C. Moses. (Signed by Judge Paul A. Engelmayer on 8/22/2022) (tg)
August 19, 2022 Opinion or Order CASE ACCEPTED AS RELATED. Create association to 1:22-cv-05740-PAE-BCM. Notice of Assignment to follow. (vba)
August 19, 2022 Opinion or Order NOTICE OF CASE REASSIGNMENT to Judge Paul A. Engelmayer. Judge Unassigned is no longer assigned to the case. (vba)
August 19, 2022 Opinion or Order Magistrate Judge Barbara C. Moses is so designated. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Section 636(c) and Fed. R. Civ. P. 73(b)(1) parties are notified that they may consent to proceed before a United States Magistrate Judge. Parties who wish to consent may access the necessary form at the following link: #https://nysd.uscourts.gov/sites/default/files/2018-06/AO-3.pdf. (vba)
July 25, 2022 Opinion or Order Pro Se Payment of Fee Processed: $402.00 Check processed by the Finance Department on 7/25/22, Receipt Number 3296. (ps)
July 5, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 1 COMPLAINT against Actavis Generics, Actavis Laboratories FL, Inc., Actavis Laboratories UT, Inc., Teva North America, Teva Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd. Document filed by Nivedita T. Kulkarni. (sac)
July 5, 2022 Opinion or Order Case Designated ECF. (sac)

Access additional case information on PACER

Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the U.S. Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.

Access this case on the New York Southern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Kulkarni v. Actavis Generics 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: Nivedita T. Kulkarni
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: Actavis Generics
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: Actavis Laboratories UT, Inc.
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: Actavis Laboratories FL, Inc.
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: Teva North America
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: Teva Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd.
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?