AKM Enterprises Inc v. Hayes et al
| AKM Enterprises Inc d/b/a Moblize and AKM Enterprises, Inc doing business as Moblize |
| Steven Lee Hayes, Jr., Samarth Gupte, Ryan Dawson and Corva |
| 4:2023cv04144 |
| November 1, 2023 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of Texas |
| George C Hanks |
| Other Statutory Actions |
| 88 U.S.C. § 8888 Other Statutory Actions |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on December 29, 2023. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 23 Amended EMERGENCY MOTION by Corva, Corva AI, LLC, Ryan Dawson, Samarth Gupte, Steven Lee Hayes, Jr, filed. Motion Docket Date 1/19/2024. (Attachments: #1 Proposed Order Proposed Order re Emergency Opposed Motion for Additional Time)(Johnson, Millard) |
| Filing 22 Opposed MOTION for Extension of Time ADDITIONAL TIME TO FILE REPLY TO PLAINTIFFS RESPONSE IN OPPOSTION TO MOTION TO DISMISS UNDER FED. R. CIV. P. 12(b)(6) AND FOR MORE DEFINIATE STATEMENT by Corva, Corva AI, LLC, Ryan Dawson, Samarth Gupte, Steven Lee Hayes, Jr, filed. Motion Docket Date 1/18/2024. (Attachments: #1 Proposed Order ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS OPPOSED MOTION FOR ADDITIONAL TIME)(Johnson, Millard) |
| Filing 21 MOTION for Leave to File Plaintiff's Unredacted Response and supporting confidential documents under seal by AKM Enterprises, Inc, filed. Motion Docket Date 1/12/2024. (Attachments: #1 Proposed Order for Leave to File to file Under Seal)(Clark, Michael) |
| Filing 20 RESPONSE in Opposition to #12 Opposed MOTION to Dismiss Defendants Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6) Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State Claim or, in the Alternative, Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(e) Motion for More Definite Statement, filed by AKM Enterprises, Inc. (Attachments: #1 Proposed Order Denying Motion for Definite Statement, #2 Proposed Order Denying Motion to Dismiss)(Clark, Michael) |
Filing 19
ORDER granting #14 Unopposed MOTION to Compel Arbitration. All claims asserted against Samarth Gupte are dismissed. Plaintiff shall file a demand for arbitration within 60 days of the date of this Order. (Signed by Judge George C Hanks, Jr) Parties notified. (ByronThomas, 4)
|
|
Filing 18
ORDER granting #13 Unopposed MOTION to Compel Arbitration. All claims asserted against Steven Hayes are dismissed. Plaintiff shall file a demand for arbitration within 60 days of the date of this Order. (Signed by Judge George C Hanks, Jr) Parties notified. (ByronThomas, 4)
|
| Filing 17 REQUEST for pre-motion conference, filed.(DeLuca, Bradley) |
| Filing 16 CERTIFICATE OF INTERESTED PARTIES by Corva AI, LLC, filed.(DeLuca, Bradley) |
| Filing 15 ANSWER to #1 Complaint by Corva, filed.(DeLuca, Bradley) |
| Filing 14 Unopposed MOTION to Compel Arbitration by Samarth Gupte, filed. Motion Docket Date 12/26/2023. (Attachments: #1 Proposed Order Proposed Order Granting Defendant Samarth Gupte's Unopposed Motion to Compel Arbitration)(DeLuca, Bradley) |
| Filing 13 Unopposed MOTION to Compel Arbitration by Steven Lee Hayes, Jr, filed. Motion Docket Date 12/26/2023. (Attachments: #1 Proposed Order Proposed Order Granting Defendant Steven Haye's Unopposed Motion to Compel Arbitration)(DeLuca, Bradley) |
| Filing 12 Opposed MOTION to Dismiss Defendants Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6) Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State Claim or, in the Alternative, Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(e) Motion for More Definite Statement by Corva, filed. Motion Docket Date 12/26/2023. (Attachments: #1 Proposed Order Proposed Order Granting Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6), #2 Proposed Order Proposed Order Granting Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(e))(DeLuca, Bradley) |
| The above entitled action is assigned to United States District Judge George C. Hanks, Jr. Attorneys and Pro Se individuals are responsible for complying with this Court's rules and procedures, specifically, under Rule 6. Motion Practice. B. Pre-Motion Conferences Required for Particular Motions. Please download and review the individual practices of the assigned District Judge, located at: https://www.txs.uscourts.gov/sites/txs/files/GCH_Court_Procedures.pdf. (Note: If clicking the link does not work, you can copy/paste the url into your web browser address bar to view the procedures.) (ByronThomas, 4) |
| Filing 11 CORPORATE DISCLOSURE STATEMENT by AKM Enterprises, Inc, filed.(Clark, Michael) |
| Filing 10 Summons Issued as to All Defendants. Issued summons delivered to plaintiff by NEF, filed.(RebeccaBecknal, 4) |
| Filing 9 Letter to US Southern District Court of TX (Houston) updating Plaintiff's address by AKM Enterprises, Inc, filed.(Clark, Michael) |
| Filing 8 CERTIFICATE OF INTERESTED PARTIES by AKM Enterprises, Inc, filed.(Clark, Michael) |
|
Filing 7
ORDER for Initial Pretrial and Scheduling Conference and Order to Disclose Interested Persons. Initial Conference set for 3/6/2024 at 09:00 AM by video before Magistrate Judge Andrew M Edison. (Signed by Judge George C Hanks, Jr) Parties notified.(RebeccaBecknal, 4)
|
| Filing 6 Request for Issuance of Summons as to Corva, filed.(Clark, Michael) |
| Filing 5 Request for Issuance of Summons as to Ryan Dawson, filed.(Clark, Michael) |
| Filing 4 Request for Issuance of Summons as to Samarth Gupte, filed.(Clark, Michael) |
| Filing 3 Request for Issuance of Summons as to Steven Lee Hayes, Jr, filed.(Clark, Michael) |
| Filing 2 Request for Issuance of Summons as to Ryan Dawson, filed.(Clark, Michael) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT against All Defendants (Filing fee $ 402 receipt number ATXSDC-30751092) filed by AKM Enterprises Inc d/b/a Moblize.(Clark, Michael) |
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 Southern 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.
