Anderson et al v. DePuy Orthopaedics, Inc. et al
| Gerald Blank, Judith Anderson and Brady Price |
| DePuy Orthopaedics Inc. and Johnson and Johnson |
| 1:2013cv20388 |
| April 11, 2013 |
| US District Court for the Northern District of Ohio |
| Cleveland Office |
| Cuyahoga |
| Personal Inj. Prod. Liability |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1332 Diversity-Product Liability |
| Both |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
11
ORDER To File Joint Jurisdictional Statement - The Court ORDERS the parties to meet and confer, and conduct whatever investigation necessary, to determine whether this Court has diversity jurisdiction. If the parties agree that diversity jurisdic tion is proper, they shall file a joint jurisdictional statement by April 19, 2013 setting forth the basis for each of their citizenships and whether they agree that the amount in controversy exceeds $75,000 exclusive of interest and costs. If the parties cannot agree on their respective citizenships or the amount in controversy, any party who disagrees shall file a separate jurisdictional statement by April 19, 2013 setting forth its views on those issues. The joint jurisdictional statement, or the competing jurisdictional statement, shall satisfy Plaintiffs' obligations under Local Rule 81-1. Signed by Judge Jane Magnus-Stinson on 4/10/2013. (JKS) [Transferred from insd on 4/11/2013.]
|
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 Ohio Northern 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.
