Richardson RFPD, Inc. v. Nexus Technologies, Inc.
Richardson RFPD, Inc. |
Nexus Technologies, Inc. |
1:2021cv00336 |
November 8, 2021 |
US District Court for the Western District of North Carolina |
W Carleton Metcalf |
Martin Reidinger |
Contract: Recovery/Enforcement |
28 U.S.C. ยง 1332 |
None |
Docket Report
This docket was last retrieved on June 23, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
Document Text |
---|
Filing 6 MOTION for Extension of Time to Answer by Nexus Technologies, Inc.. (Wilder, Raboteau). Motions referred to W. Carleton Metcalf. |
TEXT-ONLY ORDER granting #6 Motion for Extension of Time to Answer. Nexus Technologies, Inc. answer due 1/10/2022. Text of Order: ORDER: The Consent Motion for Extension of Time is GRANTED, and the deadline for Defendant to file an answer or otherwise respond to Plaintiff's Complaint is EXTENDED through and including January 10, 2022. So Ordered. Entered by Magistrate Judge W. Carleton Metcalf on 12/21/2021. (kkb) |
Filing 5 MOTION for Extension of Time to Answer or Otherwise Respond to Complaint by Nexus Technologies, Inc.. (Wilder, Raboteau). Motions referred to W. Carleton Metcalf. |
Filing 4 NOTICE of Appearance by Raboteau T. Wilder, Jr on behalf of Nexus Technologies, Inc. (Wilder, Raboteau) |
TEXT-ONLY ORDER granting #5 Motion for Extension of Time to Answer or Otherwise Respond to Complaint. Nexus Technologies, Inc. answer due 12/21/2021. Text of Order: ORDER: The Motion for Extension of Time is GRANTED, and the deadline for Defendant Nexus Technologies, Inc. to file an answer or otherwise respond to Plaintiff's Complaint is EXTENDED through and including December 21, 2021. So Ordered. Entered by Magistrate Judge W. Carleton Metcalf on 11/30/2021. (kkb) |
Filing 3 Summons Issued Electronically as to Nexus Technologies, Inc. NOTICE: Counsel shall print the summons and serve with other case opening documents in accordance with Fed.R.Civ.P.4 . (rhf) (Main Document 3 replaced on 11/9/2021) (rhf). Modified with corrected PDF, NEF regenerated on 11/9/2021 (rhf). |
Case assigned to Chief Judge Martin Reidinger and Magistrate Judge W. Carleton Metcalf. Notice: You must click this link to retrieve the #Case Assignment Packet. This is your only notice - you will not receive a separate document. (rhf) |
Filing 2 Corporate Disclosure Statement by Richardson RFPD, Inc. (Slater, Samuel) |
Filing 1 COMPLAINT against Nexus Technologies, Inc. ( Filing fee $ 402 receipt number ANCWDC-5307727), filed by Richardson RFPD, Inc.. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit 1 - Invoices, #2 Exhibit 2 - Terms and Conditions, #3 Exhibit 3 - Purchase Order, #4 Cover Sheet)(Slater, Samuel) |
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
Search for this case: Richardson RFPD, Inc. v. Nexus Technologies, Inc. | |
---|---|
Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
Plaintiff: Richardson RFPD, Inc. | |
Represented By: | Samuel Allen Slater |
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: Nexus Technologies, Inc. | |
Represented By: | Raboteau T. Wilder, Jr. |
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.