Seneca Investment Corporation v. Plural Additive Manufacturing Systems, Inc.
Plaintiff: Seneca Investment Corporation
Defendant: Plural Additive Manufacturing Systems, Inc.
Case Number: 3:2021cv01326
Filed: September 8, 2021
Court: US District Court for the District of Oregon
Presiding Judge: Jolie A Russo
Nature of Suit: Negotiable Instrument
Cause of Action: 12 U.S.C. ยง 1819
Jury Demanded By: Plaintiff
Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on October 4, 2021. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
October 4, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 7 ORDER issued by Magistrate Judge Jolie A. Russo: Setting a Telephonic Rule 16 Conference for 12/6/2021 at 1:30PM in Portland Chambers before Magistrate Judge Jolie A. Russo. Local Rules 16-2(b) and 26-1 require that counsel confer prior to the conference. At the conference, counsel should be prepared to discuss the status of the case, relevant dates and deadlines, and any other significant issues. If consents are going to be filed, it is helpful if they are filed prior to the time of the conference, particularly if a firm trial date is desired. (gm)
October 4, 2021 Filing 6 Corporate Disclosure Statement . Filed by Plural Additive Manufacturing Systems, Inc.. (Naemura, Theodore)
October 4, 2021 Filing 5 Answer to #1 Complaint, Filer is subject to the requirements of Fed. R. Civ. P. 7.1. Filed by Plural Additive Manufacturing Systems, Inc.. (Naemura, Theodore)
September 27, 2021 Filing 4 Acceptance/Acknowledgement of Service of Complaint, #1 on Plural Additive Manufacturing Systems, Inc. served on 9/13/2021 Filed by Seneca Investment Corporation. (Spajic, Robert)
September 10, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 3 Notice of Case Assignment to Magistrate Judge Jolie A. Russo and Discovery and Pretrial Scheduling Order. NOTICE: Counsel shall print and serve the summonses and all documents issued by the Clerk at the time of filing upon all named parties in accordance with Local Rule 3-5. Discovery is to be completed by 1/10/2022. Joint Alternate Dispute Resolution Report is due by 2/7/2022. Pretrial Order is due by 2/7/2022. Ordered by Magistrate Judge Jolie A. Russo. (ecp)
September 8, 2021 Filing 2 Corporate Disclosure Statement . Filed by Seneca Investment Corporation. (Spajic, Robert)
September 8, 2021 Filing 1 Complaint. Action on Note for Breach of Contract Filing fee in the amount of $402 collected. Agency Tracking ID: AORDC-8223916 Filer is subject to the requirements of Fed. R. Civ. P. 7.1. Jury Trial Requested: Yes. Filed by Seneca Investment Corporation against Plural Additive Manufacturing Systems, Inc. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit 1, #2 Civil Cover Sheet). (Spajic, Robert)

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 Oregon District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Seneca Investment Corporation v. Plural Additive Manufacturing Systems, Inc.
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Seneca Investment Corporation
Represented By: Jeanne F. Loftis
Represented By: Diane R. Lenkowsky
Represented By: Robert Spajic
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: Plural Additive Manufacturing Systems, Inc.
Represented By: Theodore R. Naemura
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.


Why Is My Information Online?