Natal v. Arizona Department of Agriculture
Plaintiff: Ruben Natal
Defendant: Arizona Department of Agriculture
Case Number: 2:2012cv02330
Filed: October 31, 2012
Court: US District Court for the District of Arizona
Office: Phoenix Division Office
County: Yuma
Presiding Judge: James A Teilborg
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights: Jobs
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 1331 Fed. Question: Employment Discrimination
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
January 22, 2014 Opinion or Order Filing 20 ORDER, Defendant's Motion to Dismiss 19 is granted with prejudice; the Clerk shall enter judgment accordingly and close this case. Signed by Senior Judge James A Teilborg on 1/21/14.(REW)
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 Arizona District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Natal v. Arizona Department of Agriculture
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Ruben Natal
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: Arizona Department of Agriculture
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?