Joe Hand Promotions, Inc. v. Aguirre et al
| Joe Hand Promotions, Inc. |
| Emelda Aguirre individually and d/b/a Club Rio, Ruben Aguirre individually and d/b/a Club Rio, Emelda Aguirre doing business as Club Rio and Ruben Aguirre doing business as Club Rio |
| 2:2022cv00111 |
| May 24, 2022 |
| US District Court for the Northern District of Texas |
| Matthew J Kacsmaryk |
| Lee Ann Reno |
| Other Statutes: Cable/Satellite TV |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1331 Fed. Question |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on December 13, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 12
SUMMONS Returned Executed as to Emelda Aguirre ; served on 6/2/2022. (King, Jamie)
|
|
Filing 11
NOTICE of Attorney Appearance by Jamie Renee King for Mitzi S. Mayfield on behalf of Joe Hand Promotions, Inc.. (King, Jamie)
|
|
Filing 10
STANDING ORDERS: This case is subject to the following standing orders, which concern: (1) compliance with the local counsel requirements of the Northern District of Texas; (2) required procedures for any discovery disputes that may arise in this case; and (3) required procedures for any motions for leave to file documents under seal. (Ordered by Magistrate Judge Lee Ann Reno on 6/8/2022) (mcrd)
|
|
Filing 9
STANDING ORDER OF REFERENCE: This action is hereby REFERRED to U.S. Magistrate Judge Reno for pretrial management. (Ordered by Judge Matthew J. Kacsmaryk on 6/7/2022) (daa)
|
|
Filing 8
SUMMONS Returned Executed as to Ruben Aguirre ; served on 5/28/2022. (King, Jamie)
|
|
Filing 7
NOTICE of Attorney Appearance by Jamie Renee King for Mitzi S. Mayfield on behalf of Joe Hand Promotions, Inc.. (King, Jamie)
|
|
Filing 6
ORDER denying #3 Motion. Because Plaintiff has not stated a sufficient reason to proceed without local counsel, the Court DENIES the Motion and ORDERS Plaintiff to obtain local counsel. (Ordered by Judge Matthew J. Kacsmaryk on 5/25/2022) (nhp)
|
|
Filing 5
Summons Issued as to Emelda Aguirre, Ruben Aguirre. (nhp)
|
|
Filing 4
New Case Notes: A filing fee has been paid. Pursuant to Misc. Order 6, Plaintiff is provided the Notice of Right to Consent to Proceed Before A U.S. Magistrate Judge (Judge Reno). Clerk to provide copy to plaintiff if not received electronically. (nhp)
|
|
Filing 3
MOTION for Leave to Proceed without Local Counsel filed by Joe Hand Promotions, Inc. (Attachments: #1 Proposed Order) (King, Jamie)
|
|
Filing 2
CERTIFICATE OF INTERESTED PERSONS/DISCLOSURE STATEMENT by Joe Hand Promotions, Inc.. (Clerk QC note: No affiliate entered in ECF). (King, Jamie)
|
|
Filing 1
COMPLAINT against All Defendants filed by Joe Hand Promotions, Inc.. (Filing fee $402; Receipt number 0539-12845645) Clerk to issue summons(es). In each Notice of Electronic Filing, the judge assignment is indicated, and a link to the # Judges Copy Requirements and # Judge Specific Requirements is provided. The court reminds the filer that any required copy of this and future documents must be delivered to the judge, in the manner prescribed, within three business days of filing. Unless exempted, attorneys who are not admitted to practice in the Northern District of Texas must seek admission promptly. Forms, instructions, and exemption information may be found at www.txnd.uscourts.gov, or by clicking here: # Attorney Information - Bar Membership. If admission requirements are not satisfied within 21 days, the clerk will notify the presiding judge. (Attachments: #1 Cover Sheet) (King, Jamie)
|
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 Texas Northern 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.
