Direct Technologies International, Inc. v. Maxum Indemnity Company
Plaintiff: Direct Technologies International, Inc.
Defendant: Maxum Indemnity Company
Case Number: 3:2019cv00081
Filed: February 15, 2019
Court: US District Court for the Western District of North Carolina
Presiding Judge: Max O Cogburn
Referring Judge: David Keesler
Nature of Suit: Insurance
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 1332
Jury Demanded By: Plaintiff
Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on November 26, 2019. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
April 8, 2019 NOTICE pursuant to Local Rule 16.1 you are required to conduct an Initial Attorney's Conference within 14 days. At the conference, the parties are required to discuss the issue of consent to jurisdiction of a magistrate judge in accordance with Local Rules 16.1(A) and 73.1(C). The #Certificate of Initial Attorneys Conference, and if applicable, the #Joint Stipulation of Consent to Exercise jurisdiction by a US Magistrate Judge, should be filed within 7 days of the conference. If appropriate, a party may file a Motion to Stay the Initial Attorney's Conference. CIAC Report due by 4/29/2019. (brl)
April 4, 2019 Filing 13 ANSWER to #1 Complaint, by Maxum Indemnity Company.(Fulton, Joseph)
April 1, 2019 Opinion or Order Filing 12 ORDER granting #11 Motion for Extension of Time to Answer re #1 Complaint,. Maxum Indemnity Company answer due 4/4/2019. Signed by Magistrate Judge David Keesler on 4/1/19. (mga)
March 29, 2019 Filing 11 MOTION for Extension of Time to Answer re: #1 Complaint, by Maxum Indemnity Company. (Fulton, Joseph). Motions referred to David Keesler.
March 20, 2019 Opinion or Order Filing 10 ORDER granting #8 Motion for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice. Eftihios Evan G. Andronis is hereby admitted pro hac vice to represent Defendant Maxum Indemnity Company. Signed by Magistrate Judge David Keesler on 3/20/19. (mga)
March 20, 2019 Opinion or Order Filing 9 ORDER granting #7 Motion for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice. Sina Bahadoran is hereby admitted pro hac vice to represent Defendant Maxum Indemnity Company. Signed by Magistrate Judge David Keesler on 3/20/19. (mga)
March 20, 2019 Filing 8 MOTION for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice as to Eftihios Evan G. Andronis Filing fee $ 281, receipt number 0419-3972743. by Maxum Indemnity Company. (Fulton, Joseph). Motions referred to David Keesler.
March 20, 2019 Filing 7 MOTION for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice as to Sina Bahadoran Filing fee $ 281, receipt number 0419-3972731. by Maxum Indemnity Company. (Fulton, Joseph). Motions referred to David Keesler.
March 20, 2019 Notice to Sina Bahadoran: Pursuant to Local Rule 83.1 you are required to Register for ECF at #www.ncwd.uscourts.gov. Deadline by 3/27/2019. (mga)
March 20, 2019 Notice to Eftihios Evan G. Andronis: Pursuant to Local Rule 83.1 you are required to Register for ECF at #www.ncwd.uscourts.gov. Deadline by 3/27/2019. (mga)
March 13, 2019 Opinion or Order Filing 6 ORDER granting #5 Motion for Extension of Time to Answer re #1 Complaint. Maxum Indemnity Company shall have up to and including March 29, 2019 to answer or otherwise respond to Plaintiff's Complaint. Signed by Magistrate Judge David Keesler on 3/13/19. (mga)
March 12, 2019 Filing 5 Consent MOTION for Extension of Time to Answer or Otherwise Response to Plaintiff's Complaint by Maxum Indemnity Company. (Fulton, Joseph). Motions referred to David Keesler.
March 4, 2019 Filing 4 AFFIDAVIT of Service filed by Direct Technologies International, Inc.. Maxum Indemnity Company served on 2/20/2019, answer due 3/13/2019. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A - Service Documents)(Trimmer, Daniel)
February 19, 2019 Filing 3 Summons Issued Electronically as to Maxum Indemnity Company. NOTICE: Counsel shall print the summons and serve with other case opening documents in accordance with Fed.R.Civ.P.4 . (brl)
February 19, 2019 Case assigned to District Judge Max O. Cogburn, Jr and Magistrate Judge David Keesler. Notice: You must click this link to retrieve the #Case Assignment Packet. This is your only notice - you will not receive a separate document.(brl)
February 15, 2019 Filing 2 Corporate Disclosure Statement by Direct Technologies International, Inc. (Trimmer, Daniel)
February 15, 2019 Filing 1 COMPLAINT against Maxum Indemnity Company with Jury Demand ( Filing fee $ 400 receipt number 0419-3942479), filed by Direct Technologies International, Inc.. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit Policy BDG 66733-01, #2 Exhibit Policy BDG 66733-02, #3 Exhibit Policy BDG 66733-03, #4 Exhibit Policy BDG 66733-04, #5 Exhibit Policy BDG 66733-05, #6 Exhibit Policy BDG 66733-06, #7 Exhibit Underlying Complaint, #8 Exhibit Letter from Maxum)(Trimmer, Daniel)

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 North Carolina Western District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Direct Technologies International, Inc. v. Maxum Indemnity Company
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Maxum Indemnity Company
Represented By: Eftihios Evan G Andronis
Represented By: Sina Bahadoran
Represented By: Joseph Walker Fulton
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 ]
Plaintiff: Direct Technologies International, Inc.
Represented By: Daniel Stephen Trimmer
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?