Annett v. Autovin, Inc.
Ed Annett |
Autovin, Inc. |
2:2021cv01206 |
March 22, 2021 |
US District Court for the Southern District of Ohio |
Sarah D Morrison |
Chelsey M Vascura |
Civil Rights: Jobs |
28 U.S.C. ยง 1332 |
Plaintiff |
Docket Report
This docket was last retrieved on May 7, 2021. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
Document Text |
---|
Filing 11 PRELIMINARY PRETRIAL ORDER: The May 12, 2021 preliminary pretrial conference is VACATED. Initial Disclosures due by 5/26/2021; Joinder of Parties & Motions to Amend due by 5/31/2021; Primary Expert due by 11/1/2021; Rebuttal Expert due by 12/1/2021; Discovery (Fact) due by 11/30/2021; Dispositive motions due by 1/14/2022; Settlement Demand due by 6/25/2021; Response to Settlement Demand due by 7/23/2021; Case is referred to Mediation in 11/2021. Signed by Magistrate Judge Chelsey M. Vascura on 5/7/2021. (kk2) |
Filing 10 RULE 26(f) REPORT by Defendant Autovin, Inc. & Plaintiff Ed Annett (Mounts, Benjamin) Modified parties on 5/5/2021 (kk2) |
Filing 9 NOTATION ORDER granting #7 & #8 Motions for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice of Craig Borowski and Sarah Fox as co-counsel. Co-counsels are directed to register for e-filing through PACER unless they have done so previously. Signed by Magistrate Judge Chelsey M. Vascura on 5/4/0021. (kk2) |
Filing 8 MOTION for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice (Filing fee of $200 paid, receipt number AOHSDC-8295947) of Sarah Fox by Defendant Autovin, Inc. (Attachments: #1 Text of Proposed Order) (Mounts, Benjamin) |
Filing 7 MOTION for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice (Filing fee of $200 paid, receipt number AOHSDC-8295885) of Craig Borowski by Defendant Autovin, Inc. (Attachments: #1 Text of Proposed Order) (Mounts, Benjamin) |
Filing 6 NOTICE of Hearing: Initial Conference set for 5/12/2021 11:30 AM in Teleconference before Magistrate Judge Chelsey M. Vascura. (agm) |
Filing 5 ANSWER to #1 Complaint filed by Autovin, Inc. (Mounts, Benjamin) |
Filing 4 SUMMONS Returned Executed: Autovin, Inc. served on 3/29/2021, answer due 4/19/2021 (Attachments: #1 Certified Mail Receipt Return) (kk2) |
Filing 3 CERTIFICATE of Mailing by Clerk: A copy of the complaint and issued summons was sent to the named defendant via certified mail. (er) |
Filing 2 Summons Issued as to Autovin, Inc. (kk2) |
Filing 1 COMPLAINT with JURY DEMAND against Autovin, Inc. ( Filing fee $ 402 paid - receipt number: AOHSDC-8228971), filed by Ed Annett. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet, #2 Summons Form) (Moyle, Jeffrey) |
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 Southern 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: Annett v. Autovin, Inc. | |
---|---|
Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
Plaintiff: Ed Annett | |
Represented By: | Jeffrey Joseph Moyle |
Represented By: | Christopher James Lalak |
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: Autovin, Inc. | |
Represented By: | Benjamin W. Mounts |
Represented By: | Sarah Alexandra Fox |
Represented By: | Craig Matthew Borowski |
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.