Chun Kim, Administratrix of the Estate of Pyong Tok Lee, deceased v. Patel et al
| Chun Kim, Administratrix of the Estate of Pyong Tok Lee, deceased |
| Neelkumar Patel and KK Carriers Services, LLC |
| 2:2022cv00166 |
| April 22, 2022 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia |
| Robert J Krask |
| Rebecca Beach Smith |
| Motor Vehicle |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1332 Diversity-Motor Vehicle/Wrongful Death |
| Both |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on May 20, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 13 STIPULATION of Dismissal Without Prejudice by Chun Kim, Administratrix of the Estate of Pyong Tok Lee, deceased. (Thomas, Martin) |
| Notice of Correction re #12 First MOTION to Voluntarily Dismiss : Document #12 was filed as a motion to voluntarily dismiss, but titled as a stipulation of dismissal. The filing user is directed to either file a proper stipulation of dismissal (which is dismissal without a Court order pursuant to Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(ii); such document therefore should contain no verbiage indicating it is an order), or to file an actual motion to voluntarily dismiss, with a proposed dismissal order as an attachment. The Clerk's Office will remove document #12 from the docket. (bpet, ) |
| Filing 12 First MOTION to Voluntarily Dismiss by Chun Kim, Administratrix of the Estate of Pyong Tok Lee, deceased. (Thomas, Martin) |
| Filing 11 REPORT of Rule 26(f) Planning Meeting by KK Carriers Services, LLC, Neelkumar Patel. (Michelle, Paul) |
Filing 10
RULE 26(f) PRETRIAL ORDER: Rule 16(b) Scheduling Conference set for 5/25/2022 at 10:00 AM by conference call to be initiated by counsel. Signed by Magistrate Judge Robert J. Krask on May 2, 2022. (sche)
|
| Refer for 16(b) (bpet, ) |
| Filing 9 ANSWER to Complaint by KK Carriers Services, LLC.(Michelle, Paul) |
| Filing 8 ANSWER to Complaint by Neelkumar Patel.(Michelle, Paul) |
| Notice of Correction re #6 , #7 Answers to Complaint: These documents contain the case caption of the Circuit Court from which this case has been removed. The filing user is directed to refile the documents with a caption that reflects that this case is in the Eastern District of Virginia, with the appropriate EDVA case number, and with a signature block in conformance with the requirements as set out in the EDVA eFiling Policies and Procedures Manual. (bpet, ) |
| Filing 7 ANSWER to Complaint by Neelkumar Patel.(Michelle, Paul) |
| Filing 6 ANSWER to Complaint by KK Carriers Services, LLC.(Michelle, Paul) |
| Filing 5 Magistrate Judge Notice and Judge's Information to counsel. (epri, ) |
| Filing 4 Notice of Removal Corrected, filed by Neelkumar Patel, KK Carriers Services, LLC. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A)(Michelle, Paul) |
| Filing 3 NOTICE of Appearance by John Ryan Owen on behalf of KK Carriers Services, LLC, Neelkumar Patel (Owen, John) |
| Filing 2 Financial Interest Disclosure Statement (Local Rule 7.1) by KK Carriers Services, LLC, Neelkumar Patel. (Michelle, Paul) |
| Filing 1 Notice of Removal ( Filing fee $ 402, receipt number AVAEDC-8357982.), filed by Neelkumar Patel, KK Carriers Services, LLC. #1 Civil Cover Sheet) (Michelle, Paul) |
| Initial Case Assignment to District Judge Rebecca Beach Smith and Magistrate Judge Robert J. Krask. (epri, ) |
| Notice of Correction re #1 Notice of Removal. Filing user has been directed to file all documents filed in the state court case being removed to EDVA. (epri, ) |
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 Virginia Eastern 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.
