Weeks et al v. GEICO Indemnity Company
| Fabian P Cano and Lindsay L Weeks |
| GEICO Indemnity Company |
| 4:2020cv01001 |
| September 8, 2020 |
| US District Court for the Northern District of Texas |
| Reed C O'Connor |
| Contract: Insurance |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1332 |
| Both |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on October 13, 2020. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 7
ORDER... Before the Court is Defendants Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 4), filed September 14, 2020. Plaintiffs were required to file their response to the Motion by October 5, 2020. See L. R. 7.1(e).1To date, Plaintiffs have not filed a response. If Plaintiffs intend on opposing the relief that Defendant seeks in its Motion, they must file a response to the Motion by October 16, 2020. (Ordered by Judge Reed C. O'Connor on 10/13/2020) (wxc)
|
|
Filing 6
SCHEDULING ORDER: This case is set for trial on this Court's four-week docket beginning 11/1/2021 before Judge Reed C. O'Connor. Joinder of Parties due by 11/30/2020. Amended Pleadings due by 11/30/2020. Dispositive Motions due by 7/5/2021. Deadline for mediation is on or before 5/5/2021. Discovery due by 6/4/2021. Pretrial Materials/Order due by 10/7/2021. (see order) (Ordered by Judge Reed C. O'Connor on 10/1/2020) (tln)
|
| Filing 5 Joint STATUS REPORT filed by GEICO Indemnity Company. (Thompson, Stacy) |
| Filing 4 MOTION to Dismiss filed by GEICO Indemnity Company (Thompson, Stacy) |
|
Filing 3
ORDER REQUIRING SCHEDULING CONFERENCE AND REPORT FOR CONTENTS OF SCHEDULING ORDER...Lead counsel for each party (or a designee attorney with appropriate authority) and any unrepresented party (except for a prisoner litigant proceeding pro se) shall confer (the Scheduling Conference) as soon as practicable, but in any event no later than September 25, 2020,....Joint Report due by 10/9/2020. (Ordered by Judge Reed C. O'Connor on 9/11/2020) (wrb)
|
| Filing 2 New Case Notes: A filing fee has been paid. File to: Judge O Connor. Pursuant to Misc. Order 6, Plaintiff is provided the Notice of Right to Consent to Proceed Before A U.S. Magistrate Judge. Clerk to provide copy to plaintiff if not received electronically. Attorneys are further reminded that, if necessary, they must comply with Local Rule 83.10(a) within 14 days or risk the possible dismissal of this case without prejudice or without further notice. (tln) |
| CERTIFICATE OF INTERESTED PERSONS/DISCLOSURE STATEMENT by GEICO Indemnity Company. (see doc. #1 for image) (tln) |
| Filing 1 NOTICE OF REMOVAL WITH JURY DEMAND filed by GEICO Indemnity Company. (Filing fee $400; receipt number 0539-11151932) 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 Exhibit(s) 1, #2 Exhibit(s) 2, #3 Exhibit(s) 3, #4 Exhibit(s) 4, #5 Exhibit(s) 5) (Thompson, Stacy) |
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.
