Alvarez v. Texas Workforce Commission
| Adrian Alvarez and Adriana Alvarez |
| Texas Workforce Commission |
| 3:2023cv00147 |
| April 11, 2023 |
| US District Court for the Western District of Texas |
| David C Guaderrama |
| Civil Rights: Jobs |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 2000 e Job Discrimination (Employment) |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on August 21, 2023. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 15
WAIVER OF SERVICE Returned Executed by Adriana Alvarez as to Texas Workforce Commission. Waiver sent on 5/15/2023, answer due 6/13/2023. (em)
|
|
Filing 14
REQUEST FOR WAIVER of Service of Summons sent to Texas Workforce Commission on 5/9/2023 by Adriana Alvarez (mv) . (Additional attachment(s) added on 5/10/2023: #1 Waiver of Service of Summons) (mv).
|
|
Filing 13
ORDER DENYING MOTION AS MOOT re #1 MOTION to Proceed in forma pauperis filed by Adriana Alvarez. Signed by Judge David C Guaderrama. (em)
|
|
Filing 12
Certified Mail Receipt TO ADRIANA AALVAREZ of Order on Motion for Electronic Filing, (em)
|
|
Filing 11
COMPLAINT ( Filing fee $ 402 receipt number 1185), filed by Adriana Alvarez.(em)
|
|
Filing 10
Filing fee received in the amount of $402, receipt number 1185 (em)
|
|
Filing 9
Transmittal via Certified Mailing and regular mail to Adriana Alvarez of #8 Report and Recommendations (mc4)
|
|
Filing 8
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS of the Magistrate Judge re #1 Motion to Proceed in forma pauperis filed by Adriana Alvarez. Signed by Judge Robert F. Castaneda. (mc4)
|
|
Filing 7
Certified Mailing of Order on Motion for Electronic Filing, (em)
|
|
Text Order GRANTING #5 Pro Se Motion for Permission to file Electronically. The Court emphasizes that should it find, at any time, that Plaintiff's use of the e-filing system is unsatisfactory--for example, by filing unnecessary or duplicitous documents--the Court will consider revoking Plaintiff's e-filing privileges. Entered by Judge David C Guaderrama. (This is a text-only entry generated by the court. There is no document associated with this entry.) (phlc)
|
|
Filing 6
JS44 (Civil Cover Sheet) submitted by Adriana Alvarez. (em)
|
|
Filing 5
Pro Se MOTION for Permission to file Electronically by Adriana Alvarez. (em)
|
|
Filing 4
Certified Mail Receipt of #2 Order Referring Motion, (em)
|
|
Filing 3
Certified Mailing of #2 Order Referring Motion, (em)
|
|
Filing 2
ORDER REFERRING MOTION: #1 MOTION to Proceed in forma pauperis filed by Adriana Alvarez; The Court also REFERS Plaintiff Adriana Alvarezs Complaint (ECF No. 1-1) to Judge Castaeda for a REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION on whether her Complaint should bedismissed under 28 U.S.C. 1915(e). Signed by Judge David C Guaderrama. Referral Magistrate Judge: Robert F. Castaneda. (em)
|
|
Filing 1
MOTION to Proceed in forma pauperis by Adrian Alvarez. (Attachments: #1 Complaint, #2 Civil Cover Sheet, #3 Notice, #4 Waiver)(em)
|
|
Case assigned to Judge David C Guaderrama. Judge David C Guaderrama no longer assigned to the case. CM WILL NOW REFLECT THE JUDGE INITIALS AS PART OF THE CASE NUMBER. PLEASE APPEND THESE JUDGE INITIALS TO THE CASE NUMBER ON EACH DOCUMENT THAT YOU FILE IN THIS CASE. (em)
|
|
"All parties shall comply with the Standing Orders of Judge David C. Guaderrama located at http://www.txwd.uscourts.gov/Rules/StandingOrders/default.asp#elpaso" (em)
|
|
If ordered by the court, all referrals will be assigned to Magistrate Judge Castaneda (em)
|
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 Texas 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.
