James v. Carley et al
| David James |
| Jacob Carley, Dustin Batt, Daniel Major and Timothy Albert Ramirez |
| 1:2022cv00060 |
| April 20, 2022 |
| US District Court for the District of Utah |
| Jared C Bennett |
| Dale A Kimball |
| Daphne A Oberg |
| Civil Rights: Other |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1441 Notice of Removal- Civil Rights Act |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on May 26, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 10
ORDER TO PROPOSE SCHEDULE - Plaintiff must propose a schedule to Defendants in the form of a draft Attorney Planning Meeting Report within fourteen (14) days. See order for additional instructions. Signed by Magistrate Judge Daphne A. Oberg on 5/26/2022. (eat)
|
|
Filing 9
ORDER REFERRING CASE to Magistrate Judge Daphne A. Oberg under 28:636 (b)(1)(A), Magistrate to hear and determine all nondispositive pretrial matters. No attached document. Signed by Judge Dale A. Kimball on 5/25/2022. (eat)
|
| Filing 8 The deadline for submission of Consent/Reassignment Forms has now passed. The parties failed to file, therefore the case is ineligible for magistrate assignment. Case randomly assigned to Judge Dale A. Kimball. Magistrate Judge Jared C. Bennett no longer assigned to the case. (alf) |
| Filing 7 NOTICE REMINDER - All parties are requested to respond within the time frame set forth in the #4 Notice of Presiding Magistrate Assignment,, pursuant to General Order 07-001. If you have already consented/objected, please disregard this notice. No judge will be informed of a party's response unless all parties have consented to the assignment of the matter to a U.S. Magistrate Judge. Unless consents from all parties are received within fifteen(15) days, the case will be randomly re-assigned to a U.S. District Judge without further notice.# Link to Magistrate Consent Objection form (alf) |
| Filing 6 ANSWER to Complaint with Jury Demand filed by Dustin Batt, Jacob Carley, Daniel Major, Timothy Albert Ramirez.(Young, R.) |
| Filing 5 ERRATA to #2 Notice of Removal, filed by Defendants Dustin Batt, Jacob Carley, Daniel Major, Timothy Albert Ramirez . (Young, R.) |
| Filing 4 NOTICE - This case is assigned to a magistrate judge. To consent or request reassignment, use # the form on this link or use the included form for non-efilers and send it toconsents@utd.uscourts.govwithin 15 days or mail to the court with Attention: Consent Clerk on the envelope. Notice e-mailed or mailed to Defendants Dustin Batt, Jacob Carley, Daniel Major, Timothy Albert Ramirez, Plaintiff David James. Form due by 5/5/2022. (mh) |
| Filing 3 NOTICE OF ADR, e-mailed or mailed to Defendants Dustin Batt, Jacob Carley, Daniel Major, Timothy Albert Ramirez, Plaintiff David James. (mh) |
| Filing 2 NOTICE OF REMOVAL from 1st District Court, Cache County, case number 210100015, (Filing fee $ 402, receipt number AUTDC-4311749) filed by Jacob Carley, Daniel Major, Timothy Albert Ramirez, Dustin Batt. Assigned to Magistrate Judge Jared C. Bennett (Young, R.) |
| Filing 1 Case has been indexed and assigned to Magistrate Judge Jared C. Bennett. Defendants Dustin Batt, Jacob Carley, Daniel Major, Timothy Albert Ramirez are directed to E-File the Notice of Removal and cover sheet (found under Complaints and Other Initiating Documents) and pay the filing fee of $ 402 by the end of the business day.NOTE: The court will not have jurisdiction until the opening document is electronically filed and the filing fee paid in the CM/ECF system. (mh) |
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 Utah 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.
