Raskin v. Jenkins et al
Plaintiff: Allyson Raskin
Defendant: Clay Jenkins and Michael Scarpello
Case Number: 3:2022cv02012
Filed: September 10, 2022
Court: US District Court for the Northern District of Texas
Presiding Judge: Ada Brown
Referring Judge: Irma Carrillo Ramirez
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights: Voting
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 1331 Fed. Question
Jury Demanded By: None
Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on September 11, 2023. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
November 2, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 15 Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendation: Based on the relevant filings and applicable law, #3 Defendants Clay Jenkins and Michael Scarpello's Rules 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6) [sic]; and Motion to Dismiss, filed 9/19/2022, should be GRANTED in part; #10 Petitioner's Opposed Motion for Preliminary Injunction Against Electronic Voting Systems, filed 10/4/2022, should be DENIED; and the case should be DISMISSED for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. (Ordered by Magistrate Judge Irma Carrillo Ramirez on 11/2/2022) (mcrd)
October 31, 2022 Filing 14 OBJECTION filed by Allyson Raskin re: #13 Reply (Raskin, Allyson)
October 24, 2022 Filing 13 REPLY filed by Clay Jenkins, Michael Scarpello re: #5 Response/Objection (Stool, Benjamin)
October 18, 2022 Filing 12 RESPONSE filed by Clay Jenkins, Michael Scarpello re: #10 First MOTION for Injunction 191st (Stool, Benjamin)
October 5, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 11 ORDER re: #10 Petitioner's Opposed Motion for Preliminary Injunction Against Electronic Voting System. The defendants may file a response by 10/18/2022. The plaintiff may file a reply by 10/25/2022. (Ordered by Magistrate Judge Irma Carrillo Ramirez on 10/5/2022) (mcrd)
October 4, 2022 Filing 10 Opposed MOTION for Preliminary Injunction Against Electronic Voting Systems filed by Allyson Raskin. (Attachments: #1 Proposed Order Proposed Order Approval for Injunction) (Raskin, Allyson) Modified text on 10/5/2022 (ygl).
October 4, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 9 ORDER: Before the Court is #8 Petitioner's Motion to Withdraw Remand, filed 10/3/2022. The plaintiff seeks to withdraw her prior #6 Petitioner's...Motion to Remand, filed 9/27/2022, and the motion appears to be unopposed. The motion to withdraw is GRANTED, and the motion to remand this case is DEEMED WITHDRAWN. (Ordered by Magistrate Judge Irma Carrillo Ramirez on 10/4/2022) (mcrd)
October 3, 2022 Filing 8 First MOTION to Withdraw Remand filed by Allyson Raskin (Attachments: #1 Proposed Order Motion to Withdraw Remand) (Raskin, Allyson) Modified text on 10/4/2022 (ygl).
September 28, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 7 ORDER re: #6 Petitioner's...Motion to Remand. The defendants may file a response by 10/18/2022. The plaintiff may file a reply by 11/1/2022. (Ordered by Magistrate Judge Irma Carrillo Ramirez on 9/28/2022) (mcrd)
September 27, 2022 Filing 6 ***WITHDRAWN, per #9 Order*** Petitioner's Response to Respondents' Notice of Removal and MOTION to Remand filed by Allyson Raskin with Brief/Memorandum in Support. (Attachments: #1 Proposed Order) (Raskin, Allyson) Modified on 9/28/2022 to conform to actual title of filing (mcrd). Modified on 10/4/2022 (ygl).
September 27, 2022 Filing 5 RESPONSE filed by Allyson Raskin re: #3 MOTION to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim (Attachments: #1 Proposed Order) (Raskin, Allyson)
September 22, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 4 ORDER re: #3 Defendants Clay Jenkins and Michael Scarpello's Rules 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6); and Motion to Dismiss and Notice of Related Cases Under Local Rule 3.3. The plaintiff may file a response by 10/10/2022. The defendants may file a reply by 10/24/2022. (Ordered by Magistrate Judge Irma Carrillo Ramirez on 9/22/2022) (mcrd)
September 19, 2022 Filing 3 MOTION to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction , Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim() filed by Clay Jenkins, Michael Scarpello with Brief/Memorandum in Support. (Stool, Benjamin)
September 10, 2022 Filing 2 New Case Notes: A filing fee has been paid. CASREF case referral set and case referred to Magistrate Judge Ramirez (see Special Order 3). Case received over counter or electronically. No prior sanctions found. (For court use only - links to the #national and #circuit indexes.) Pursuant to Misc. Order 6, Plaintiff is provided the Notice of Right to Consent to Proceed Before A U.S. Magistrate Judge (Judge Ramirez). Clerk to provide copy to plaintiff if not received electronically. (mms)
September 10, 2022 CERTIFICATE OF INTERESTED PERSONS/DISCLOSURE STATEMENT by Clay Jenkins, Michael Scarpello. (See document #1 -15 for image) (Clerk QC note: No affiliate entered in ECF). (mms)
September 10, 2022 Filing 1 NOTICE OF REMOVAL filed by Clay Jenkins, Michael Scarpello. (Filing fee $402; receipt number CTXNDC-13130956) 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. (Attachments: #1 Additional Page(s) index of state court documents, #2 Additional Page(s) 1 docket sheet, #3 Additional Page(s) 2a plaintiff's original petition pages 1-262, #4 Additional Page(s) 2b plaintiff's original petition pages 263-463, #5 Additional Page(s) 2c plaintiff's original petition pages 464-545, #6 Proposed Order 3 plaintiff's, #7 Additional Page(s) 4 plaintiff's request to issue citations, #8 Additional Page(s) 5 citation issued to Clay Jenkins, #9 Additional Page(s) 6 citation issued to Michael Scarpello, #10 Additional Page(s) 7 return of service of citation to Michael Scarpello, #11 Additional Page(s) 8 return of service of citation to Clay Jenkins, #12 Additional Page(s) 9 plaintiff's notice of hearing, #13 Cover Sheet, #14 Cover Sheet Supplement, #15 Additional Page(s) certificate of interested persons) (Stool, Benjamin)

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 this case: Raskin v. Jenkins et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Allyson Raskin
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Clay Jenkins
Represented By: Benjamin Laurence Stool
Represented By: Barbara S Nicholas
Represented By: J G Schuette
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Michael Scarpello
Represented By: Benjamin Laurence Stool
Represented By: Barbara S Nicholas
Represented By: J G Schuette
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]

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.


Why Is My Information Online?