The Neil Jones Food Company v. Factory Technologies Inc et al
The Neil Jones Food Company |
Does 1 through 20, inclusive, Factory Technologies, Inc., Central Valley Electric, Inc., Factory Technologies Inc, Does 1 through 20 and Central Valley Electric Inc |
3:2021cv05073 |
January 27, 2021 |
US District Court for the Western District of Washington |
Marsha J Pechman |
Contract: Other |
28 U.S.C. § 1441 |
None |
Docket Report
This docket was last retrieved on August 27, 2021. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
Document Text |
---|
Filing 29 REPLY, filed by Plaintiff The Neil Jones Food Company, TO RESPONSE to #12 MOTION to Remand (Meine, Charles) |
Filing 28 DECLARATION of Jared Hoefle filed by Defendant Factory Technologies Inc re #12 MOTION to Remand (Lee, Richard) |
Filing 27 RESPONSE, by Defendant Factory Technologies Inc, to #12 MOTION to Remand . Oral Argument Requested. (Lee, Richard) |
Filing 26 MINUTE ORDER: the Court re-notes Defendants' motions to dismiss (Dkt. Nos. #5 , #8 ) for March 26, 2021, to be considered after the briefing on the Motion to Remand (Dkt. No. #12 ) is complete. Authorized by Judge Marsha J. Pechman. (MW) |
Filing 25 DECLARATION of Jason Hunt filed by Defendant Factory Technologies Inc re #5 MOTION to Dismiss , Alternative Motion to Transfer Venue, and Request for Attorney Fees (Attachments: #1 Exhibit 1, #2 Exhibit 2, #3 Exhibit 3, #4 Exhibit 4)(Lee, Richard) |
Filing 24 Second DECLARATION of Jared Hoefle filed by Defendant Factory Technologies Inc re #5 MOTION to Dismiss , Alternative Motion to Transfer Venue, and Request for Attorney Fees (Attachments: #1 Exhibit 24, #2 Exhibit 25, #3 Exhibit 26, #4 Exhibit 27, #5 Exhibit 28, #6 Exhibit 29, #7 Exhibit 30, #8 Exhibit 31)(Lee, Richard) |
Filing 23 REPLY, filed by Defendant Factory Technologies Inc, TO RESPONSE to #5 MOTION to Dismiss , Alternative Motion to Transfer Venue, and Request for Attorney Fees (Attachments: #1 Proposed Order)(Lee, Richard) |
Filing 22 REPLY, filed by Defendant Central Valley Electric Inc, TO RESPONSE to #12 MOTION to Remand #8 MOTION to Dismiss for Lack of Personal Jurisdiction, (Pujolar, Martin) Modified on 3/5/2021 to update link to motion (KB). |
NOTICE of Docket Text Modification re #22 Reply to Response to Motion: Modified on 3/5/2021 to link to #8 MOTION to Dismiss for Lack of Personal Jurisdiction (instead of to #12 MOTION to Remand) at request of filer. (KB) |
Filing 21 PROPOSED ORDER (Unsigned) re #12 MOTION to Remand (Meine, Charles) |
Filing 20 NOTICE of Appearance by attorney Charles Fredrick Meine, III on behalf of Plaintiff The Neil Jones Food Company. (Meine, Charles) |
Filing 19 NOTICE Request for Judicial Notice with Exhibit A re #17 Response to Motion ; filed by Plaintiff The Neil Jones Food Company. (Attachments: #1 CVE's Complaint in San Benito County Superior Court)(Meine, Charles) |
Filing 18 DECLARATION of Bradley L. Dean filed by Plaintiff The Neil Jones Food Company re #8 MOTION to Dismiss for Lack of Personal Jurisdiction (Meine, Charles) |
Filing 17 RESPONSE, by Plaintiff The Neil Jones Food Company, to #8 MOTION to Dismiss for Lack of Personal Jurisdiction. Oral Argument Requested. (Meine, Charles) |
Filing 16 DECLARATION of Agustin Mota filed by Plaintiff The Neil Jones Food Company re #5 MOTION to Dismiss , Alternative Motion to Transfer Venue, and Request for Attorney Fees (Meine, Charles) |
Filing 15 DECLARATION of Bradley L. Dean filed by Plaintiff The Neil Jones Food Company re #5 MOTION to Dismiss , Alternative Motion to Transfer Venue, and Request for Attorney Fees (Meine, Charles) |
Filing 14 DECLARATION of Stephen Arnoldy filed by Plaintiff The Neil Jones Food Company re #5 MOTION to Dismiss , Alternative Motion to Transfer Venue, and Request for Attorney Fees (Meine, Charles) |
Filing 13 RESPONSE, by Plaintiff The Neil Jones Food Company, to #5 MOTION to Dismiss , Alternative Motion to Transfer Venue, and Request for Attorney Fees. Oral Argument Requested. (Meine, Charles) |
NOTE: Document #12 was filed incorrectly. Appearance of attorney C. Fredrick Meine III is not proper, and notices of electronic filing will not be sent until corrected. Signatures must be in accordance with FRCP 11 and LCR 83.2(a) and must comply with #ECF Filing Procedures. (SR)(cc: C. Fredrick Meine III via ECF ad hoc) |
Filing 12 MOTION to Remand , filed by Plaintiff The Neil Jones Food Company. Oral Argument Requested. (Attachments: #1 Memorandum Points & Authorities, #2 Declaration, #3 Declaration, #4 Declaration, #5 Proposed Order) Noting Date 3/26/2021, (Meine, Charles) |
Filing 11 NOTICE of Appearance by attorney Michael Gallagher on behalf of Defendant Central Valley Electric Inc. (Gallagher, Michael) |
Filing 10 PROPOSED ORDER (Unsigned) re #5 MOTION to Dismiss , Alternative Motion to Transfer Venue, and Request for Attorney Fees (Lee, Richard) |
Attorney Mark Carl Dean added as counsel for Central Valley Electric Inc per #7 Notice of Appearance. (PM) |
NOTE re Motion to Dismiss #8 . The appearance of attorney Michael E. Gallagher is not proper per LCR 83.1(d), and notices of electronic filing will not be sent until corrected. Counsel must submit a Petition for Admission and register for ECF Filing access. After you have been admitted to practice before this court, please promptly file a Notice of Appearance in this case pursuant to LCR 83.1(d)(1). Questions about this process should be directed to the Attorney Admission Clerk at (206) 3708862 or WAWD_Admissions@wawd.uscourts.gov. (PM) cc: M. Gallagher via ECF ad hoc |
Filing 9 DECLARATION of Troy Wells in Support of Defendant Central Valley Electric, Inc's Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Personal Jurisdiction filed by Defendant Central Valley Electric Inc re #8 MOTION to Dismiss for Lack of Personal Jurisdiction (Pujolar, Martin) |
Filing 8 MOTION to Dismiss for Lack of Personal Jurisdiction, filed by Defendant Central Valley Electric Inc. Oral Argument Requested. (Attachments: #1 Proposed Order) Noting Date 3/5/2021, (Pujolar, Martin) |
Filing 7 NOTICE of Appearance by attorney Martin J Pujolar on behalf of Defendant Central Valley Electric Inc. (Pujolar, Martin) |
Filing 6 DECLARATION of Jared Hoefle filed by Defendant Factory Technologies Inc re #5 MOTION to Dismiss , Alternative Motion to Transfer Venue, and Request for Attorney Fees (Lee, Richard) |
Filing 5 MOTION to Dismiss , Alternative Motion to Transfer Venue, and Request for Attorney Fees, filed by Defendant Factory Technologies Inc. Oral Argument Requested. Noting Date 3/5/2021, (Lee, Richard) |
Filing 4 CORPORATE DISCLOSURE STATEMENT indicating no Corporate Parents and/or Affiliates. Filed pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P 7.1. Filed by Factory Technologies Inc (Lee, Richard) |
Filing 3 NOTICE TO FILER: re #1 Notice of Removal. Notice of Filing Deficiency** Action Required ** See attached letter for more information and instructions. (MET) cc: via ad hoc to Attorney Meine |
Filing 2 LETTER from Clerk re receipt of case from Clark County Superior Court and advising of WAWD case number and judge assignment. (MET) cc: via ad hoc to Attorney Meine |
NOTICE Pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P 7.1, Factory Technologies Inc must file a Corporate Disclosure Statement by 2/4/2021. (MET) |
Judge Marsha J. Pechman added. (MET) |
Filing 1 NOTICE OF REMOVAL from Clark County Superior Court, case number 20-2-02438-06; (Receipt # AWAWDC-6904131), filed by Factory Technologies, Inc.. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A - Amended Summons, Complaint, Notice of Assignment to Judicial Department, #2 Civil Cover Sheet)(Lee, Richard) (Attachment 1 replaced on 1/28/2021) (MET). |
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.