Berrios Gonzalez v. Hospital Menonita Guayama, Inc. et al
| Maria Berrios Gonzalez |
| Hospital Menonita Guayama, Inc. or alternatively, John Doe Corporation, d/b/a Hospital Menonita de Guayama, Dr. Juan D. Ortiz Rivera, Mary Roe, Conjugal Partnership Ortiz-Roe, Dr. Luis G. Flores Rivera, Betty Roe, Conjugal Partnership Flores-Roe, John Does 1, 2 and 3, A, B and C Corporations, Unknown Insurance Companies A through H, Hospital Menonita Guayama, Inc. or alternatively, John Doe Corporation doing business as Hospital Menonita de Guayama, Jane Roe, Unknown Insurance Company and Dr. Richard Roe |
| 3:2022cv01069 |
| February 8, 2022 |
| US District Court for the District of Puerto Rico |
| Francisco A Besosa |
| Personal Inj. Med. Malpractice |
| 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Medical Malpractice |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on November 8, 2023. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 18
SCHEDULING ORDER/CASE MANAGEMENT ORDER: Jury Trial set for 9/18/2023 09:00 AM in Old San Juan Courtroom before Senior Judge Francisco A. Besosa. Initial Scheduling Conference set for 6/21/2022 02:00 PM in Old San Juan Courtroom before Senior Judge Francisco A. Besosa. Pretrial/Settlement Conference set for 9/11/2023 01:30 PM in Old San Juan Courtroom before Senior Judge Francisco A. Besosa. Amended Pleadings due by 5/2/2022. Discovery due by 2/24/2023. Memorandum Filing due by 5/31/2022. Motions due by 10/21/2022. Outstanding Pleadings due by 4/25/2022. Proposed Pretrial Order due by 8/25/2023. Follow Up Deadline due by 4/18/2022.Signed by Senior Judge Francisco A. Besosa on 4/4/2022.(om)
|
|
Filing 17
ANSWER to #4 Amended Complaint filed by Gilberto C. Ramos-Martinez on behalf of Defendant Hospital Menonita Guayama, Inc..(Ramos-Martinez, Gilberto)
|
|
Filing 16
ANSWER to #4 Amended Complaint filed by Melissa Figueroa-Del Valle on behalf of Defendant Luis G. Flores Rivera.(Figueroa-Del Valle, Melissa)
|
|
Filing 15
ORDER re #13 Motion for Extension of Time to Answer: GRANTED. but answer deadline is extended until March 31, 2022. No additional extensions will be allowed. Signed by Senior Judge Francisco A. Besosa on 03/07/2022. (brc)
|
|
Filing 14
ORDER re #11 Motion for Extension of Time to Answer: GRANTED. Answer deadline is extended until March 31, 2022. No additional extensions will be allowed. Signed by Senior Judge Francisco A. Besosa on 03/07/2022. (brc)
|
|
Filing 13
MOTION for Extension of Time to File Answer re: #1 Complaint filed by Maria Berrios Gonzalez filed by Anselmo Irizarry-Irizarry on behalf of Conjugal Partnership Ortiz-Roe, Juan D. Ortiz Rivera Responses due by 3/21/2022. NOTE: Pursuant to FRCP 6(a) an additional three days does not apply to service done electronically. (Related document(s) #1 ) (Irizarry-Irizarry, Anselmo)
|
|
Filing 12
NOTICE of Appearance by Melissa Figueroa-Del Valle on behalf of Luis G. Flores Rivera (Figueroa-Del Valle, Melissa)
|
|
Filing 11
MOTION for Extension of Time to File Answer OR OTHERWISE PLEAD filed by Igor Dominguez-Perez on behalf of Luis G. Flores Rivera Responses due by 3/18/2022. NOTE: Pursuant to FRCP 6(a) an additional three days does not apply to service done electronically. (Dominguez-Perez, Igor)
|
|
Filing 10
NOTICE of Appearance by Juan Antonio Pedrero-Lozada on behalf of Hospital Menonita Guayama, Inc. (Pedrero-Lozada, Juan)
|
|
Filing 9
NOTICE of Appearance by Jose J. Lamas-Rivera on behalf of Hospital Menonita Guayama, Inc. (Lamas-Rivera, Jose)
|
|
Filing 8
NOTICE of Appearance by Miguel E. Sagardia-De-Jesus on behalf of Hospital Menonita Guayama, Inc. (Sagardia-De-Jesus, Miguel)
|
|
Filing 7
ORDER re #5 Motion for extension of time: GRANTED. Answer deadline is extended until April 1, 2022. No additional extensions will be allowed. Signed by Senior Judge Francisco A. Besosa on 03/03/2022. (brc)
|
|
Filing 6
SUMMONS Returned Executed by All Plaintiffs upon Conjugal Partnership Flores-Roe served on 2/15/2022, answer due 3/8/2022; Conjugal Partnership Ortiz-Roe served on 2/15/2022, answer due 3/8/2022; Luis G. Flores Rivera served on 2/15/2022, answer due 3/8/2022; Hospital Menonita Guayama, Inc. served on 2/11/2022, answer due 3/4/2022; Juan D. Ortiz Rivera served on 2/15/2022, answer due 3/8/2022; Betty Roe served on 2/15/2022, answer due 3/8/2022; Mary Roe served on 2/15/2022, answer due 3/8/2022. (Efron, David)
|
|
Filing 5
MOTION for extension of time filed by Gilberto C. Ramos-Martinez on behalf of Hospital Menonita Guayama, Inc. Responses due by 3/16/2022. NOTE: Pursuant to FRCP 6(a) an additional three days does not apply to service done electronically. (Ramos-Martinez, Gilberto)
|
|
Filing 4
AMENDED COMPLAINT against Conjugal Partnership Flores-Roe, Conjugal Partnership Ortiz-Roe, Luis G. Flores Rivera, Hospital Menonita Guayama, Inc., Juan D. Ortiz Rivera, Mary Roe, Betty Roe, filed by Maria Berrios Gonzalez.(Efron, David)
|
|
Filing 3
Summons Issued as to Conjugal Partnership Flores-Roe, Conjugal Partnership Ortiz-Roe, Luis G. Flores Rivera, Hospital Menonita Guayama, Inc., Juan D. Ortiz Rivera, Betty Roe, Mary Roe (Attachments: #1 Summons) (arg)
|
|
Filing 2
NOTICE OF JUDGE ASSIGNMENT Case has been assigned to Senior Judge Francisco A. Besosa (arg)
|
|
Filing 1
COMPLAINT against All Defendants ( Filing fee $402 receipt number APRDC-7631406.), filed by Maria Berrios Gonzalez. Service due by 5/9/2022, (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet, #2 Category Sheet, #3 Summons)(Efron, David)
|
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 Puerto Rico 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.
