Ritter v. Buckeye Machine Fabricators, Inc. et al
| Charles Ritter |
| Buckeye Machine Fabricators, Inc. and D. Ray Marshall |
| 3:2022cv01501 |
| August 23, 2022 |
| US District Court for the Northern District of Ohio |
| James G Carr |
| Labor: Other |
| Both |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on October 17, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 8 Answer to #6 Amended complaint with Jury Demand filed by Buckeye Machine Fabricators, Inc., D. Ray Marshall. (Smith, Jeffery) |
| Filing 7 Memorandum in Opposition to #5 Motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim pursuant to Civ. R. 12(b)(6) filed by Charles Ritter. (Morehart, Douglas) |
| Filing 6 First Amended complaint against All Defendants. Filed by Charles Ritter. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A Wyandot County Public Health , #2 Exhibit B Wyandot County Public Health dated 07/24/2020) (Morehart, Douglas) |
Order: [non-document] On review of the docket, it appearing that there is a pending (Doc. #5 ) motion to dismiss, it is hereby ordered that; 1) leave granted to plaintiff to file its response/opposition on or before 10/13/2022; 2) leave granted to defendant to file its reply on or before 10/27/2022. Parties to notify the court if they want to request/schedule a status conference beforehand; status conference to be scheduled after adjudication of the motion to dismiss. Judge James G. Carr on 9/13/2022. (D,TM)
|
| Filing 5 Motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim pursuant to Civ. R. 12(b)(6) filed by Buckeye Machine Fabricators, Inc., D. Ray Marshall. (Smith, Jeffery) |
|
Order [non-document] granting #4 Consent Motion for extension of time to answer or otherwise respond to Plaintiff's Complaint. Buckeye Machine Fabricators, Inc., answer due 9/13/2022; D. Ray Marshall answer due 9/13/2022. Judge James G. Carr on 8/26/2022. (D,TM)
|
| Filing 4 Consent Motion for extension of time until September 13, 2022 to answer or Otherwise Respond to Plaintiff's Complaint filed by Buckeye Machine Fabricators, Inc., D. Ray Marshall. (Smith, Jeffery) |
| Notice to Attorney Douglas M. Morehart. The Court finds no record of your being admitted to practice in the Northern District of Ohio. Pursuant to LR 83.5, an Application for Admission to Practice or a Motion to be Admitted Pro Hac Vice in this case must be filed within 10 business days. The local rules and the attorney admission application are available on the court's web site at: www.ohnd.uscourts.gov. If you are not the attorney of record in this case, a Motion to Withdraw as Attorney pursuant to LR 83.9 must be filed within 10 business days. (W,Jo) |
| Filing 3 Magistrate Consent Form issued. (K,AR) |
| Filing 2 Supplement to Notice of Removal, - Civil Cover Sheet, filed by All Defendants. Related document(s) #1 . (Beach, William) |
| Judge Jack Zouhary assigned to case. (K,AR) |
| Random Assignment of Magistrate Judge pursuant to Local Rule 3.1. In the event of a referral, case will be assigned to Magistrate Judge Darrell A. Clay. (K,AR) |
| Judge James G. Carr assigned to case Judge Jack Zouhary terminated. (K,AR) |
| Filing 1 Notice of Removal from Hardin County Common Pleas, case number 20221096CVH with jury demand, Filing fee paid $ 402, receipt number AOHNDC-11581384.. Filed by Buckeye Machine Fabricators, Inc., D. Ray Marshall. (Attachments: #1 Complaint Complaint filed in state court) (Beach, 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.
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.
