S-Tek, Inc. v. Intercard Inc.
| S-Tek, Inc. |
| Intercard Inc. |
| 1:2020cv01116 |
| May 21, 2020 |
| US District Court for the Northern District of Ohio |
| Dan Aaron Polster |
| Contract: Other |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1332 |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on July 9, 2020. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Minutes of proceedings [non-document] On July 9, 2020, the Court held a scheduled teleconference attended by Plaintiff's counsel Marcus L. Wainwright and Defendant's counsel Jessica Bradburn Loucks and Mark I. Wallach. The Court discussed the case and recommended that the parties begin settlement discussions. To permit these discussions, the Court extended Plaintiff's deadline to respond to Defendant's Motion to Dismiss, Doc #: #4 , to August 20, 2020. The Court scheduled a follow-up teleconference for July 30, 2020 at 1:00PM. The parties are to use the same dial-in instructions. (Court Reporter: n/a.)Time: 15 minutes. (K,K) |
| Filing 5 Corporate Disclosure Statement filed by Intercard Inc.. (Wallach, Mark) |
| Filing 4 Motion to dismiss filed by Defendant Intercard Inc.. Related document(s) #1 . (Attachments: #1 Exhibit Affidavit of Hugh LaDriere)(Wallach, Mark) |
| Notice [non-document] of Telephone Conference set for 7/9/2020 at 02:00 PM before Judge Dan Aaron Polster. (K,K) |
| Service by Clerk. Summons and Complaint addressed to Intercard Inc. placed in U.S. Mail. Type of service: certified mail. Receipt # 9414 7266 9904 2121 5646 02. (H,SP) |
| Filing 3 Original Summons and Magistrate Consent Form issued to counsel for service upon Intercard Inc. (Attachments: #1 Magistrate Consent Form) (B,R) |
| Filing 2 Corporate Disclosure Statement filed by S-Tek, Inc.. (Wainwright, Marcus) |
| Filing 1 Complaint with jury demand against Intercard Inc.. Filing fee paid $ 400, Receipt number AOHNDC-9992864.. Filed by S-Tek, Inc.. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A - April 21 Quote, #2 Exhibit B - Oct. 42 Purchase Order, #3 Exhibit C - April 5 Invoice, #4 Exhibit D - Feb 24 Quote, #5 Exhibit E - March 3 Purchase Order, #6 Exhibit F - April 1 Invoice, #7 Summons, #8 Civil Cover Sheet) (Wainwright, Marcus) |
| Random Assignment of Magistrate Judge pursuant to Local Rule 3.1. In the event of a referral, case will be assigned to Magistrate Judge David A. Ruiz. (B,R) |
| Judge Dan Aaron Polster assigned to case, (B,R) |
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 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
| Search for this case: S-Tek, Inc. v. Intercard Inc. | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Plaintiff: S-Tek, Inc. | |
| Represented By: | Marcus L. Wainwright |
| Represented By: | Owen J. Rarric |
| 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: Intercard Inc. | |
| Represented By: | Jessica Bradburn Loucks |
| Represented By: | Mark I. Wallach |
| 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.
