Pike et al v. Antero Resources Corporation
| Rufus Fordyce Pike, John Kent Pike, Jr. and Daniel Edward Pike |
| Antero Resources Corporation |
| 5:2019cv00276 |
| September 24, 2019 |
| US District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia |
| Frederick P Stamp |
| Torts to Land |
| 28 U.S.C. § 1332 |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on November 7, 2019. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 23
CLERK'S JUDGMENT. Signed by Clerk of Court on 11/7/19. (lmm)
|
|
Filing 22
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT ANTERO RESOURCES CORPORATION'S #8 MOTION TO DISMISS FOR LACK OF JURISDICTION and denying #3 Motion for Preliminary Injunction. It is further ORDERED that this civil action be DISMISSED and STRICKEN from the active docket of this Court. The Clerk is DIRECTED to enter judgment on this matter. Signed by Senior Judge Frederick P. Stamp, Jr. on 11/7/19. (lmm)
|
|
Filing 21
ORDER STAYING PROCEEDINGS IN CIVIL ACTION PENDING RESOLUTION OF DEFENDANTS #18 MOTION TO DISMISS. Signed by Senior Judge Frederick P. Stamp, Jr. on 10/22/19. (lmm)
|
|
Filing 20
REPLY to Response to Motion re #18 MOTION to Stay Pending Resolution of Motion to Dismiss filed by Antero Resources Corporation. (Lawrence, W.)
|
|
Filing 19
Memorandum in Opposition re #18 MOTION to Stay Pending Resolution of Motion to Dismiss filed by Daniel Edward Pike, Rufus Fordyce Pike, John Kent Pike, Jr.. (Ford, William)
|
|
Filing 18
MOTION to Stay Pending Resolution of Motion to Dismiss by Antero Resources Corporation. (Lawrence, W.)
|
|
Filing 17
REPLY to Response to Motion re #8 MOTION to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction Reply in Support of its Motion to Dismiss filed by Antero Resources Corporation. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A)(Lawrence, W.)
|
|
Filing 16
Memorandum in Opposition re #8 MOTION to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction filed by Daniel Edward Pike, Rufus Fordyce Pike, John Kent Pike, Jr.. (Ford, William)
|
|
Filing 15
AMENDED COMPLAINT against Antero Resources Corporation, filed by Rufus Fordyce Pike, John Kent Pike, Jr., Daniel Edward Pike. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit Exhibit A to Amended Complaint, #2 Exhibit Exhibit B to Amended Complaint, #3 Exhibit Exhibit C to Amended Complaint, #4 Exhibit Exhibit D to Amended Complaint)(Ford, William)
|
|
Filing 14
ORDER GRANTING JOINT #13 MOTION TO EXTEND DEADLINES FOR BRIEFING ON PLAINTIFFS' MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION. Responses due by 10/9/2019 and Replies due by 10/16/2019 re #8 Motion to Dismiss. Responses due by 10/22/2019 and Replies due by 10/29/2019 re #3 Motion for Preliminary Injunction. Signed by Senior Judge Frederick P. Stamp, Jr. on 10/8/19. (lmm)
|
|
Filing 13
Joint MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply to Extend Deadlines for Briefing on Plaintiffs' Motion for Preliminary Injunction by Antero Resources Corporation. (Lawrence, W.)
|
|
Filing 12
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE by Daniel Edward Pike, Rufus Fordyce Pike, John Kent Pike, Jr. re #4 MOTION for Preliminary Injunction Memorandum in Support thereof, #3 First MOTION for Preliminary Injunction against Defendant Antero Resources Corp., #5 MOTION for Hearing re #3 First MOTION for Preliminary Injunction against Defendant Antero Resources Corp. and Interrogatories and Request for Production of Documents (Ford, William)
|
|
Filing 11
SUMMONS Returned Executed as to Antero Resources Corporation served on 9/27/2019. (Ford, William)
|
|
Filing 10
ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFFS' UNOPPOSED #9 MOTION FOR AMENDED ORDER ON MOTION FOR HEARING DATE AND RESCHEDULING HEARING ON MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION. Motion Hearing set for 11/4/2019 01:30 PM in Wheeling District Judge Courtroom, South before Senior Judge Frederick P. Stamp Jr. Signed by Senior Judge Frederick P. Stamp, Jr. on 9/27/19. (lmm)
|
|
Filing 9
MOTION to Amend/Correct #6 Order on Motion for Hearing,,,, Set Motion, Evidentiary, R&R and Social Security Oral Argument Deadlines/Hearings, by Daniel Edward Pike, Rufus Fordyce Pike, John Kent Pike, Jr.. (Ford, William)
|
|
Filing 8
MOTION to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction by Antero Resources Corporation. (Attachments: #1 Attachment Memorandum of Law in Support of Antero Resources Corporation's Motion to Dismiss)(Rubenstein, Justin)
|
|
Filing 7
Corporate Disclosure Statement by Antero Resources Corporation. (Rubenstein, Justin)
|
|
Filing 6
ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFFS' #5 MOTION FOR HEARING DATE ON MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION AND SCHEDULING HEARING ON #3 MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION. Motion Hearing set for 10/1/2019 12:00 PM in Wheeling District Judge Courtroom, South before Senior Judge Frederick P. Stamp Jr. on 9/25/19. (lmm)
|
|
Filing 5
MOTION for Hearing re #3 First MOTION for Preliminary Injunction against Defendant Antero Resources Corp. by Daniel Edward Pike, Rufus Fordyce Pike, John Kent Pike, Jr.. (Ford, William)
|
|
Filing 4
Memorandum in Support thereof by Daniel Edward Pike, Rufus Fordyce Pike, John Kent Pike, Jr.. (Ford, William) Modified on 9/24/2019 to change docket text to "Memorandum" and regenerate NEF(soa).
|
|
Filing 3
First MOTION for Preliminary Injunction against Defendant Antero Resources Corp. by Daniel Edward Pike, Rufus Fordyce Pike, John Kent Pike, Jr.. (Ford, William)
|
|
Filing 1
COMPLAINT against Antero Resources Corporation, filed by Rufus Fordyce Pike, John Kent Pike, Jr., Daniel Edward Pike. Filing Fee $400 - Receipt #0424-2906717 (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A - Deed, #2 Exhibit B - Affidavit of Heirship, #3 Exhibit C - 11/17/14 Letter, #4 Exhibit D - 8/29/19 Letter, #5 Civil Cover Sheet)(lmm)
|
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.
- 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.
