Ferree et al v. Amazon.Com, Inc. et al
| Renee Ferree, Uriah Ferree and U.K. |
| Amazon.Com, Inc., Amazon.com Services, LLC, Joyo Technology Co., LTD, Shenzhen Joyo Technology Co., Miaoyan Trading Co. LTD d/b/a KMISE/KMISE-US and Miaoyan Trading Co. LTD d/b/a Kmise/Kmis-US, a foreign corporation |
| 7:2023cv01065 |
| June 12, 2023 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina |
| Louise Wood Flanagan |
| Tort Product Liability |
| 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability |
| Both |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on April 29, 2024. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 12 Rule 26(f) Report (joint) filed by Amazon.Com, Inc., Amazon.com Services, LLC. (Cherry, William) |
TEXT ORDER - This matter is before the court of its own initiative upon review of the record in this matter, which record reflects three foreign defendants have not been served or entered an appearance. Plaintiffs are DIRECTED to report on the docket within 14 days the status of service upon defendants Joyo Technology Co., LTD; Shenzhen Joyo Technology Co.; and Miaoyan Trading Co. LTD., and to propose a deadline by which plaintiffs reasonably and diligently will effect service. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(m) ("If a defendant is not served within 90 days after the complaint is filed, the courton motion or on its own after notice to the plaintiffmust dismiss the action without prejudice against that defendant or order that service be made within a specified time.... This subdivision (m) does not apply to service in a foreign country[.]"); Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(f)(1) ("Unless federal law provides otherwise, an individual... may be served at a place not within any judicial district of the United States... by any internationally agreed means of service that is reasonably calculated to give notice, such as those authorized by the Hague Convention on the Service Abroad of Judicial and Extrajudicial Documents."); Volkswagenwerk Aktiengesellschaft v. Schlunk, 486 U.S. 694, 705 (1988) ("[C]ompliance with the Convention is mandatory in all cases to which it applies."). Failure to timely respond may result in dismissal without prejudice of defendants Joyo Technology Co., LTD; Shenzhen Joyo Technology Co.; and Miaoyan Trading Co. LTD. Signed by District Judge Louise Wood Flanagan on 7/31/2023. (Collins, S)
|
| Case Selected for Mediation - A printable list of certified mediators for the Eastern District of North Carolina is available on the court's Website, http://www.nced.uscourts.gov/attorney/mediators.aspx. Please serve this list on all parties. (Collins, S) |
| Filing 11 Notice of Appearance filed by Christopher L Brinkley on behalf of Renee Ferree. (Brinkley, Christopher) |
| Filing 10 Notice of Special Appearance for non-district by Joseph William Owen on behalf of All Plaintiffs. (Owen, Joseph) |
| Filing 9 ANSWER to Complaint with Jury Demand by Amazon.Com, Inc., Amazon.com Services, LLC. (Cherry, William) |
| Filing 8 Notice of Special Appearance for non-district by William Robert Cherry, Jr on behalf of Amazon.Com, Inc., Amazon.com Services, LLC. (Cherry, William) |
| Filing 7 Notice of Special Appearance for non-district by William Robert Cherry, Jr on behalf of Amazon.Com, Inc., Amazon.com Services, LLC. (Cherry, William) |
| Filing 6 Notice of Appearance filed by William Robert Cherry, Jr on behalf of Amazon.Com, Inc., Amazon.com Services, LLC. (Cherry, William) |
| Filing 5 Notice of Appearance filed by Joseph William Owen on behalf of All Plaintiffs. (Owen, Joseph) |
| Filing 4 Notice regarding #1 Notice of Removal and requirement to make a Notice of Appearance sent to Counsel, Plaintiff's Counsel, J. William Owen of Musselwhite, Musselwhite, Branch & Grantham, P.A. at P. O. Box 1448, Lumberton, NC 28359; Patrick E. Carr, Michal E. Carr & Christopher Brinkley of Carr & Carr at 4416 S. Harvard Ave, Tulsa, OK 74135 and Pro Se Defendant, JOYO Technology Co. Ltd. at Rm. 1005 10/F HO King COML Ctr., 2-16 FA Yuen St., Mongkok, Hong Kong, China; Pro Se Defendant, Shenzhen JOYO Technology Co. Ltd. at 2/F Lushi Industry Building, 28th District BaoAn, XinAn Rd., BaoAn District, Shenzhen, Guangdong, 518101, CN and Pro Se Defendant, Miaoyan Trading Co. Ltd d/b/a KMISE/KMIS-US at 604 YIHaoChangQU BaoFUZhuBao Yuan at 33 Bulan Rd NanWan St. LongGang, Shenzhen, GuanoDong, 518114, CN mailed via US Mail on June 16, 2023. (Rudd, D.) |
| Notice to Counsel regarding: #1 Notice of Removal, #2 Financial Disclosure Statement, #3 Financial Disclosure Statement. The filing includes information that is subject to privacy protection under Fed. R. Civ. P.5.2/Fed. R. Crim.P. 49.1. A party waives the federal rule privacy protection by filing the document without redaction and not under seal. The clerk's office has placed the document under temporary seal but will remove the document security after 7 days if counsel does not file the appropriate motion and a redacted copy. (Rudd, D.) |
| Filing 3 Financial Disclosure Statement by Amazon.com Services, LLC (Cherry, William) |
| Filing 2 Financial Disclosure Statement by Amazon.Com, Inc. (Cherry, William) |
| Filing 1 NOTICE OF REMOVAL by Amazon.Com, Inc. Removal from Robeson County Civil Superior, case number 23 CVS 912. ( Filing fee $ 402 receipt number ANCEDC-7132992), filed by Amazon.Com, Inc.. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet Initial Civil Cover Sheet, #2 Civil Cover Sheet Supplemental Removal Cover Sheet, #3 Exhibit Pleadings from State Court File, #4 Exhibit State Court Notice of Filing Notice of Removal) (Cherry, William) |
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.
- 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.
