Eshetu v. Propark Inc.
Plaintiff: Abraha B Eshetu
Defendant: Propark Inc.
Case Number: 1:2015cv11793
Filed: May 7, 2015
Court: US District Court for the District of Massachusetts
Office: Boston Office
County: Suffolk
Presiding Judge: Leo T. Sorokin
Nature of Suit: Employment
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 451
Jury Demanded By: None

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed Document Text
October 7, 2015 Opinion or Order Filing 7 District Judge Leo T. Sorokin: ORDER entered. The time for responding to the Courts August 24, 2015 Memorandum and Order expired on September 28, 2015. Having received no response to that Memorandum and Order, the above entitled action is hereby DISMISSED without prejudice. The Clerk shall enter a separate order of dismissal. The clerk mailed a copy of this order to the plaintiff.(PSSA, 4)
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 Massachusetts District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Eshetu v. Propark Inc.
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Abraha B Eshetu
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Propark Inc.
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]

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.


Why Is My Information Online?