Soignet v. Ross
| Elmo Andrew Soignet, III |
| Ricky Ross |
| 3:2020cv02418 |
| August 21, 2020 |
| US District Court for the Northern District of Texas |
| Ed Kinkeade |
| Torts/Pers Inj: Assault, Libel & Slander |
| 28 U.S.C. § 1332 |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on December 16, 2020. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 22
ELECTRONIC ORDER granting #21 Unopposed Motion to Extend Time to File Reply. Replies due by 10/23/2020. (Ordered by Judge Ed Kinkeade on 10/15/2020) (chmb)
|
| Filing 21 MOTION for Extension of Time to File Reply to #9 MOTION to Dismiss filed by Ricky Ross (Cole, Ryan) Modified docket text and linkage on 10/16/2020 (oyh). |
| Filing 20 Appendix in Support filed by Elmo Andrew Soignet, III re #18 Response/Objection to Defendant's Motion to Dismiss Complaint and Motion to Transfer Venue (Gaudioso, Monica) |
| Filing 19 Brief/Memorandum in Support filed by Elmo Andrew Soignet, III re #18 Response/Objection to Defendant's Motion to Dismiss Complaint, or in the Alternative, to Transfer Venue (Gaudioso, Monica) |
| Filing 18 RESPONSE filed by Elmo Andrew Soignet, III re: #9 MOTION to Dismiss (Gaudioso, Monica) |
| Filing 17 (Document Restricted) Attorney Contact Information (Sealed pursuant to SO 19-1, statute, or rule) filed by Elmo Andrew Soignet, III (Gaudioso, Monica) |
|
Filing 16
ORDER - Before the Court is Defendant Ricky Ross's Motion for Extension of Time to File Motion to Dismiss (the "Motion"). Doc. No. 12). After careful consideration of the Motion and relevant caselaw, the Court DENIES the Motion as moot. The United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit has held that the Texas Citizens Participation Act ("TCPA") does not apply to diversity cases in federal court. Klocke v. Watson, 936 F.3d 240, 242 (5th Cir. 2019) ("[T]he TCPA does not apply to diversity cases in federal court."). The Court therefore DENIES the Motion as moot. (Ordered by Judge Ed Kinkeade on 9/21/2020) (chmb)
|
|
Filing 15
ELECTRONIC ORDER granting #14 Unopposed Motion for Extension of Time to Respond to Defendant's Motion to Dismiss the Complaint, or in the Alternative, to Transfer Venue. Responses due by 10/2/2020. (Ordered by Judge Ed Kinkeade on 9/18/2020) (chmb)
|
| Filing 14 MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply to #9 MOTION to Dismiss , #10 Brief/Memorandum in Support of Motion filed by Elmo Andrew Soignet, III (Gaudioso, Monica) |
| Filing 13 NOTICE of Plaintiff's Designation of Local Counsel filed by Elmo Andrew Soignet, III (Gaudioso, Monica) |
| Filing 12 MOTION for Extension of Time to File Motion to Dismiss filed by Ricky Ross (Cole, Ryan) |
|
Filing 11
ELECTRONIC ORDER: On August 25, 2020, the Court entered an order requiring Plaintiff's Counsel Thomas P Henican, to become admitted to practice in this District (See LR 83.7), or move the Court to be admitted Pro Hac Vice (See LR 83.9(b)), and to designate local counsel pursuant to Local Civil Rule 83.10(a). Plaintiff's law office inquired with the Court on this date about an extension to comply with these deadlines. The Court GRANTS the extension. Plaintiff's Counsel shall have an additional 30 days from the date of this order to comply with the Court's August 25, 2020 order. (Ordered by Judge Ed Kinkeade on 9/14/2020) (chmb)
|
| Filing 10 Brief/Memorandum in Support filed by Ricky Ross re #9 MOTION to Dismiss (Browning, John) |
| Filing 9 MOTION to Dismiss Complaint, or in the Alternative, to Transfer Venue filed by Ricky Ross (Browning, John) Enhanced text on 8/31/2020 (dsr). |
| Filing 8 AMENDED DOCUMENT by Ricky Ross. Amendment to #1 Notice of Removal,,,,. Amended Notice of Removal. (Browning, John) |
| Filing 7 Application for Admission Pro Hac Vice with Certificate of Good Standing (Filing fee $100; Receipt number 0539-11114401) filed by Ricky Ross (Attachments: #1 Exhibit(s))Attorney Jack K. Whitehead, Jr added to party Ricky Ross(pty:dft) (Whitehead, Jack) |
| ***Clerk's Notice of delivery: (see NEF for details) Docket No:4, 5, 6. NEF Wed Aug 26 09:17:36 CDT 2020 (crt) |
|
Filing 6
ORDER: This case was removed from State Court on August 21, 2020. It has come to the Courts attention that Plaintiff's counsel, Thomas P Henican, is not admitted to practice in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas. Therefore, within 21 days from the date of this order, counsel for Plaintiff must either become admitted to practice in this District (See LR 83.7), or move the Court to be admitted Pro Hac Vice (See LR 83.9(b)).Further, this Court requires Local Counsel. Within 21 days from the date of this order, counsel for Plaintiff must also designate local counsel pursuant to Local Civil Rule 83.10(a). Failure to comply with this Order may result in dismissal of this case without prejudice and without further notice. (Ordered by Judge Ed Kinkeade on 8/25/2020) (chmb)
|
|
Filing 5
ELECTRONIC ORDER: Local Rule 83.10(a) requires the appearance of local counsel where counsel of record for a party does not reside in this district. Accordingly, within twenty days of this date, Defendant, Ricky Ross, shall file the entry of appearance of local counsel satisfying the requirements of Local Rule 83.10(a). Failure to do so may result defendant's pleadings being stricken and default taken against that defendant without further notice. (Ordered by Judge Ed Kinkeade on 8/25/2020) (chmb)
|
|
Filing 4
ORDER: Federal courts are vested with subject-matter jurisdiction over all civil actions "arising under the Constitution, laws, or treaties of the United States," or where the case in controversy exceeds $75,000 and is between citizens of different states, or between citizens of a state and citizens or subjects of a foreign state. 28 U.S.C. 1331, 1332(a)(1)(2) (2012). Defendant is ORDERED to amend his Removal within ten (10) days from the date this Order is signed. Failure to properly establish diversity jurisdiction will result in remand to state court without further notice. See FED. R. CIV. P. 12(h)(3) ("If the court determines at any time that it lacks subject-matter jurisdiction, the court must dismiss the action."). (Ordered by Judge Ed Kinkeade on 8/24/2020) (chmb)
|
| Filing 3 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 Toliver). Clerk to provide copy to plaintiff if not received electronically. (oyh) |
| Filing 2 CERTIFICATE OF INTERESTED PERSONS/DISCLOSURE STATEMENT by Ricky Ross. (Browning, John) |
| Filing 1 NOTICE OF REMOVAL WITH JURY DEMAND filed by Ricky Ross. (Filing fee $400; receipt number 0539-11101642) 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 and Instructions 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. (Browning, John) |
| ***Clerk's Notice of delivery: (see NEF for details) Docket No:3. Fri Aug 21 16:07:34 CDT 2020 (crt) |
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.
