Shah v. drugstore.com inc et al
| Nigan Shah |
| drugstore.com inc, Kal Raman, Robert A Barton and Peter M Neupert |
| 2:2004cv01478 |
| June 25, 2004 |
| US District Court for the Western District of Washington |
| Ricardo S Martinez |
| Securities/Commodities |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on October 8, 2004. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 6
ORDER to Consolidate by Judge Ricardo Martinez. (RS, )
|
| Filing 5 MINUTE ORDER REASSIGNING CASE. Case reassigned to Judge Ricardo Martinez for all further proceedings as related to case number C04-1474RSM. Judge Robert S. Lasnik no longer assigned to case.(KERR, ) |
| Filing 4 ACCEPTANCE OF SERVICE of summons and complaint by counsel Barry M. Kaplan on behalf of Defendants Robert A Barton, Peter M Neupert, Kal Raman, drugstore.com inc on 08/27/04. (Desper, Juli) |
|
Filing 3
ORDER REGARDING INITIAL DISCLOSURES, JOINT STATUS REPORT AND EARLY SETTLEMENT Joint Status Report due by 9/21/2004; by Judge Robert S. Lasnik. (KERR, )
|
| Filing 2 NOTICE of Appearance by attorney Barry M Kaplan on behalf of Defendants drugstore.com inc, Kal Raman, Robert A Barton, Peter M Neupert (Kaplan, Barry) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT and JURY TRIAL DEMANDED against defendant(s) Robert A Barton, Peter M Neupert, Kal Raman, drugstore.com inc (Summons(es) issued) (Receipt # 409092) , filed by Nigan Shah.(PM, ) |
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 Washington Western 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.
