Gordon v. Robbins et al
| James Gordon |
| Kyle Robbins, Centimark Corporation and BBL Fleet Company |
| 1:2023cv02149 |
| December 27, 2023 |
| US District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania |
| Daryl F Bloom |
| Motor Vehicle |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1441 Petition for Removal- Personal Injury |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on February 22, 2024. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 6 ANSWER to Complaint by Centimark Corporation. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit(s) Exhibit A - Email)(Jayman, Aaron) |
| Filing 5 MOTION to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim by BBL Fleet Company. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit(s) Exhibit A - Amended Complaint, #2 Exhibit(s) B - E-Mail, #3 Proposed Order Proposed Order)(Jayman, Aaron) |
| Filing 4 NOTICE of Appearance by Aaron Scott Jayman on behalf of BBL Fleet Company, Centimark Corporation (Jayman, Aaron) |
| Filing 3 NOTICE of Appearance by Thomas M Chairs on behalf of BBL Fleet Company, Centimark Corporation (Chairs, Thomas) |
| Filing 2 DECLARATION of Courtney K. Mazzio In Support of Defendant's Notice of Removal by Centimark Corporation re #1 Notice of Removal. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A, #2 Exhibit B, #3 Exhibit C)(ll) . |
| Filing 1 NOTICE OF REMOVAL by Centimark Corporation ( Filing fee $ 405 ), filed by Centimark Corporation. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet)(ll) |
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 Pennsylvania Middle 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.
