Yoo v. CTI Biopharma Corp. et al
| David Yoo |
| CTI Biopharma Corp., Adam Craig, Laurent Fischer, David Parkinson, Diane Parks, Matthew D. Perry, Michael A. Metzger and Reed V. Tuckson |
| 1:2023cv04515 |
| May 30, 2023 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of New York |
| John G Koeltl |
| Securities/Commodities |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on June 27, 2023. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 8 NOTICE OF VOLUNTARY DISMISSAL pursuant to Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(i) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the plaintiff(s) and or their counsel(s), hereby give notice that the above-captioned action is voluntarily dismissed, against the defendant(s) CTI Biopharma Corp., Adam Craig, Laurent Fischer, Michael A. Metzger, David Parkinson, Diane Parks, Matthew D. Perry, Reed V. Tuckson. Document filed by David Yoo. Proposed document to be reviewed and processed by Clerk's Office staff (No action required by chambers)...(Smith, Evan) |
| CASE ACCEPTED AS RELATED. Create association to 1:23-cv-04437-JGK. Notice of Assignment to follow. (sgz) |
| NOTICE OF CASE REASSIGNMENT to Judge John G. Koeltl. Judge Unassigned is no longer assigned to the case. (sgz) |
| Magistrate Judge Robert W. Lehrburger 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. (sgz) |
| Filing 7 WAIVER OF SERVICE RETURNED EXECUTED. CTI Biopharma Corp. waiver sent on 6/2/2023, answer due 8/1/2023; Adam Craig waiver sent on 6/2/2023, answer due 8/1/2023; Laurent Fischer waiver sent on 6/2/2023, answer due 8/1/2023; Michael A. Metzger waiver sent on 6/2/2023, answer due 8/1/2023; David Parkinson waiver sent on 6/2/2023, answer due 8/1/2023; Diane Parks waiver sent on 6/2/2023, answer due 8/1/2023; Matthew D. Perry waiver sent on 6/2/2023, answer due 8/1/2023; Reed V. Tuckson waiver sent on 6/2/2023, answer due 8/1/2023. Document filed by David Yoo..(Smith, Evan) |
| Filing 6 ELECTRONIC SUMMONS ISSUED as to CTI Biopharma Corp., Adam Craig, Laurent Fischer, Michael A. Metzger, David Parkinson, Diane Parks, Matthew D. Perry, Reed V. Tuckson..(gp) |
| Case Designated ECF. (gp) |
| CASE REFERRED TO Judge John G. Koeltl as possibly related to 1:23-cv-04437. (gp) |
| CASE OPENING INITIAL ASSIGNMENT NOTICE: The above-entitled action is assigned to Judge Unassigned. .(gp) |
| Filing 5 REQUEST FOR ISSUANCE OF SUMMONS as to CTI BIOPHARMA CORP., ADAM CRAIG, LAURENT FISCHER, DAVID PARKINSON, DIANE PARKS, MATTHEW D. PERRY, MICHAEL A. METZGER, and REED V. TUCKSON, re: #1 Complaint,. Document filed by David Yoo..(Smith, Evan) |
| Filing 4 STATEMENT OF RELATEDNESS re: that this action be filed as related to 1:23-cv-04437-JGK. Document filed by David Yoo..(Smith, Evan) |
| Filing 3 RULE 7.1 CORPORATE DISCLOSURE STATEMENT. No Corporate Parent. Document filed by David Yoo..(Smith, Evan) |
| Filing 2 CIVIL COVER SHEET filed..(Smith, Evan) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT against CTI Biopharma Corp., Adam Craig, Laurent Fischer, Michael A. Metzger, David Parkinson, Diane Parks, Matthew D. Perry, Reed V. Tuckson. (Filing Fee $ 402.00, Receipt Number ANYSDC-27805025)Document filed by David Yoo..(Smith, Evan) |
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 Southern 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.
