Upshift Work LLC v. Instawork et al
| Upshift Work LLC |
| Instawork, Qwick, Gigpro, Wonolo, Traba, Veryable, GigSmart, Tend and John Does 1-1100 |
| 3:2025cv00345 |
| October 14, 2025 |
| U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Ohio |
| Caroline H Gentry |
| Michael J Newman |
| Labor: Fair Standards |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1332 Diversity-Breach of Contract |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on October 23, 2025. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 10
ORDER OF TRANSFER - The Clerk of Court is DIRECTED TO TRANSFER this case to the Southern District of Ohio, Western Division at Cincinnati, for all further proceedings. Signed by Magistrate Judge Caroline H. Gentry on 10/23/25. (pb)
|
| Filing 9 WAIVER OF SERVICE Returned Executed. Waiver sent to GigSmart on 10/15/2025, answer due 12/15/2025. (Duwel, David) |
| Intra District Transfer - Case transferred to USDC Western Division at Cincinnati as case number 1:25-cv-771. This case has been closed and all future filings should be made in case number 1:25-cv-771. (pb) |
| Filing 8 WAIVER OF SERVICE Returned Executed. Waiver sent to Gigpro on 10/15/2025, answer due 12/15/2025. (Duwel, David) |
| Filing 7 WAIVER OF SERVICE Returned Executed. Waiver sent to Instawork on 10/15/2025, answer due 12/15/2025. (Duwel, David) |
| Filing 6 RESPONSE TO ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE by Plaintiff Upshift Work LLC. (Duwel, David) |
|
Filing 5
NOTICE OF DEFICIENCY AND ORDER - This matter is before the Court upon a sua sponte review for compliance with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 7.1(a)(2). Neither Plaintiff Upshift Work LLC nor Defendant Instawork have filed a diversity disclosure statement as required by that Rule. Plaintiff Upshift Work LLC are Defendant Instawork are therefore ORDERED to file such a statement no later than fourteen days from the date of this Order. A sample "Diversity of Citizenship Disclosure Statement" is available on the Court's website. IT IS SO ORDERED. Signed by Magistrate Judge Caroline H. Gentry on 10/22/2025. (acw)
|
| Filing 4 NOTICE of Appearance by Mathew A. Parker for Defendant Instawork (Parker, Mathew) |
|
Filing 3
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE - Accordingly, the Court ORDERS Plaintiff to show cause, no later than FOURTEEN (14) DAYS from the date of this Order, why this matter should not be transferred to the Cincinnati seat of this Court. IT IS SO ORDERED. Signed by Magistrate Judge Caroline H. Gentry on 10/20/2025. (acw)
|
| Filing 2 Summons Issued as to Instawork, Qwick, Gigpro, Wonolo, Traba, Veryable, GigSmart, and Tend. (srb) |
| CLERK'S NOTICE: In accordance with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 73 and 28 U.S.C. 636(c), the parties are notified that if all parties consent, a United States magistrate judge of this court is available to conduct all proceedings in this civil action including a (jury or nonjury) trial and to order the entry of a final judgment. The form may be accessed at the following link: #AO-085. The consent form should be filled out, signed and filed electronically only if all parties wish to consent. You may withhold your consent without adverse substantive consequences. Do NOT return or file the consent form unless all parties have signed the consent. (srb) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT with JURY DEMAND against All Defendants ( Filing fee $ 405 paid - receipt number: AOHSDC-10724664), filed by Upshift Work LLC. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet, #2 Summons Form) (Duwel, David) |
Access additional case information on PACER
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the U.S. 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
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.
