Lacombe et al v. TV Direct, LLC et al
| Brandon Lacombe and Ashley Lacombe |
| GABRIEL BROTHERS, INC. and TV Direct, LLC |
| 3:2021cv00063 |
| April 13, 2021 |
| US District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania |
| Kim R Gibson |
| Prop. Damage Prod. Liability |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1332 |
| Both |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on May 17, 2021. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 12 ANSWER to #10 Amended Crossclaim, by TV DIRECT, LLC. (Hatzell, John) |
| Filing 11 REPORT of Rule 26(f) Planning Meeting. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit, #2 Exhibit) (McGlynn, Joseph) |
| Filing 10 AMENDED #7 Answer to Notice of Removal, Crossclaim, CROSSCLAIM against TV DIRECT, LLC by GABRIEL BROTHERS, INC. (Haas, Brad) |
| Filing 9 Disclosure Statement identifying none as corporate parent or other affiliate, by GABRIEL BROTHERS, INC. (Haas, Brad) |
Filing 8
ORDER - Pursuant to Local Rule 16.1 and 16.2, an Initial Rule 16 Case Management Conference shall be held TELEPHONICALLY on July 8, 2021, at 10:00 a.m., and as more fully stated in said Order. Signed by Judge Kim R. Gibson on 4/26/2021. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit "A" - Stipulation Selecting ADR Process, #2 Exhibit "B" - Fed.R.Civ. P. 26(f) Report, #3 Exhibit "C" - Initial Scheduling Order) (dlg)
|
| Set/Reset Hearings: Initial Case Management Conference is set for 7/8/2021 at 10:00 AM before Judge Kim R. Gibson. (dlg) |
| Filing 7 ANSWER to Notice of Removal with Jury Demand Affirmative Defenses, CROSSCLAIM against TV Direct, LLC by GABRIEL BROTHERS, INC.. (Haas, Brad) |
| CLERK'S OFFICE QUALITY CONTROL MESSAGE re #7 Answer to Notice of Removal, Crossclaim. ERROR: Party did not file disclosure statement as required pursuant L.R. 7.1.1. CORRECTION: Attorney advised to file statement within 7 days. Disclosure Statement due by 4/30/2021. (jv) |
| Filing 6 NOTICE of Appearance by Brad E. Haas on behalf of GABRIEL BROTHERS, INC.. (Haas, Brad) |
| Filing 5 NOTICE that the instant civil action has been designated for placement into the United States District Court's Alternative Dispute Resolution program. Parties are directed to fully complete the required 26(f) report, which includes the stipulation of selecting an ADR process. Counsel for plaintiff (or in the case of a removal action, counsel for removing defendant) shall make service of the notice on all parties. (krh) |
| Filing 4 Case transferred in from District of Pennsylvania Middle; Case Number 1:21-cv-00640. Original file certified copy of transfer order and docket sheet received. |
|
Filing 3
ORDER TRANSFERRING CASE- This matter is hereby TRANSFERRED to the United States District Court for Western District of Pennsylvania pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1404(a) inasmuch as all actions complained of in the Plaintiffs complaint occurred in Blair County, Pennsylvania, which is located within the jurisdiction of the Western District of Pennsylvania, and there are no facts pled providing a nexus to the Middle District. The Clerk of Court shall CLOSE the file on this case within the Middle District of Pennsylvania. (eo)
|
| Filing 2 ANSWER to Complaint by TV Direct, LLC.(Hatzell, John) |
| Filing 1 NOTICE OF REMOVAL by TV Direct, LLC from Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County, case number 02470. (Filing fee $ 402 receipt number APAMDC-5538215), filed by TV Direct, LLC. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet)(rw) (Additional attachment(s) added on 4/7/2021: #2 Designation Form) (rw). |
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 Western 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.
