Malden Transportation Inc v. Uber Technologies, Inc. et al
Malden Transportation Inc |
Raiser LLC and Uber Technologies, Inc. |
Medallion Capital Inc and Medallion Bank |
2:2018cv01592 |
October 31, 2018 |
US District Court for the Western District of Washington |
Seattle Office |
Ricardo S Martinez |
Other Statutory Actions |
Civil Miscellaneous Case |
None |
Docket Report
This docket was last retrieved on November 6, 2018. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
Document Text |
---|
Filing 9 ORDER granting Defendant Uber Technologies, Inc.'s #1 Motion to Compel Documents from Third-Parties Medallion Bank and Medallion Capital; no later than seven (7) days from the date of this Order, Medallion Capital, Inc., and Medallion Bank shall fully comply with the subpoenas served by Uber Technologies, Inc. Signed by Judge Ricardo S. Martinez.(SWT) |
Filing 8 DECLARATION of Julianne Landsvik filed by Defendants Raiser LLC, Uber Technologies, Inc. re #1 MOTION to Compel (Attachments: #1 Exhibit 1, #2 Exhibit 2)(Durbin, Christopher) |
Filing 7 REPLY, filed by Defendants Raiser LLC, Uber Technologies, Inc., TO RESPONSE to #1 MOTION to Compel (Durbin, Christopher) |
Attorney Philip S McCune for Medallion Bank and Medallion Capital Inc added; per #4 Response to Motion. (CDA) |
Attorney Christopher T Wion for Medallion Bank and Medallion Capital Inc added; per #4 Response to Motion. (CDA) |
Filing 6 ORDER by Judge Robert S. Lasnik. This matter comes before the Court on defendants motion to compel production of documents by non-parties in a civil action pending in the District of Massachusetts. The parties from whom discovery is sought have opposed the motion to compel. In light of the contested nature of this proceeding, the Clerk of Court is directed to give this matter a civil action number and assign it in rotation. (CDA) |
MINUTE ENTRY: Pursuant to the #6 Order in case number 2:18-mc-00098 RSL, the case has been assigned a civil case number, the case has been randomly assigned to Hon. Ricardo S Martinez, case number 2:18-CV-1592 RSM. All future pleadings must now bear the newly assigned civil case number. (CDA) |
Filing 5 STIPULATION AND ORDER by Judge Robert S. Lasnik re #1 MOTION to Compel : Medallion Bank and Medallion Capital shall file their response to the Motion by October 26, 2018; Uber shall file a reply, if needed, by November 2, 2018; and the Motion shall be noted on November 2, 2018. (CDA) |
Filing 4 RESPONSE, by In Re Medallion Bank, Medallion Capital Inc, to #1 MOTION to Compel. (Attachments: #1 Proposed Order)(Wion, Christopher) |
Filing 3 STIPULATION AND PROPOSED ORDER by parties re #1 MOTION to Compel (Wion, Christopher) |
Filing fee received: $ 47, receipt number SEA092757 (CDA) |
Filing 2 CORPORATE DISCLOSURE STATEMENT indicating no Corporate Parents and/or Affiliates. Filed pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P 7.1. Filed by Uber Technologies, Inc. (CDA) |
Filing 1 MOTION to Compel Documents from Third-Parties Medallion Bank and Medallion Capital, filed by Defendants Raiser LLC, Uber Technologies, Inc.. (Attachments: #1 PROPOSED Order, #2 Declaration of Julianne Landsvik, #3 Exhibit 1 - Subpoena and accompanying cover letter issued to Medallion Bank, #4 Exhibit 2 - Subpoena and accompanying cover letter issued to Medallion Capital, #5 Exhibit 3 - August 14, 2018 email from Matthew Brown to Todd Cosenza of Willkie, Farr & Gallagher LLP, #6 Exhibit 4 - excerpt of the Form 10-Q filed with the SEC by Medallion Financial Corp., #7 Email requesting new case) Noting Date 10/26/2018, (CDA) |
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.