Alvarez v. CBOCS Incorporated
| Liliana Monroy Alvarez |
| CBOCS Incorporated |
| 2:2019cv05316 |
| October 3, 2019 |
| US District Court for the District of Arizona |
| Steven P Logan |
| Civil Rights: Jobs |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 2000 e |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on November 20, 2019. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 5 SERVICE EXECUTED filed by Liliana Monroy Alvarez: Rule 4 Waiver of Service of Summons. Waiver sent on 10/17/2019 to CBOCS, Inc. . (Carden, Joshua) |
Filing 4
ORDER that a motion pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b) is discouraged if the defect can be cured by filing an amended pleading. The parties must meet and confer prior to the filing of such motion to determine whether it can be avoided. FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff(s) serve a copy of this Order upon Defendant(s) and file a notice of service. Unless the Court orders otherwise, on January 2, 2020, the Clerk of Court shall terminate without further notice any Defendant in this action that has not been served pursuant to Rule 4(m) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. See attached Order for complete details. Signed by Judge Steven P Logan on 10/3/2019. (Attachments: #1 Attachments)(LMR)
|
| Filing 3 NOTICE TO THE PARTIES - The Court is participating in the Mandatory Initial Discovery Pilot (MIDP) and this case is subject to that pilot. The key features and deadlines are set forth in the attached Notice which includes General Order 17-08. Also attached is a checklist for use by the parties. All parties must respond to the mandatory initial discovery requests set forth in the General Order before initiating any further discovery in this case. Please note: The discovery obligations in the General Order supersede the disclosures required by Rule 26(a)(1). Any party seeking affirmative relief must serve a copy of the attached documents (Notice to Parties, including General Order 17-08 and MIDP Checklist) on each new party when the Complaint, Counterclaim, Crossclaim, or Third-Party Complaint is served. (MYE, ) |
| Filing 2 Filing fee paid, receipt number 0970-17474154. This case has been assigned to the Honorable Steven P Logan. All future pleadings or documents should bear the correct case number: CV-19-5316-PHX-SPL. Notice of Availability of Magistrate Judge to Exercise Jurisdiction form attached. (MYE, ) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT. Filing fee received: $ 400.00, receipt number 0970-17474154 filed by Liliana Monroy Alvarez.(Carden, Joshua) (Attachments: #1 Exhibit, #2 Civil Cover Sheet)(MYE, ) |
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 Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
| Search for this case: Alvarez v. CBOCS Incorporated | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Plaintiff: Liliana Monroy Alvarez | |
| Represented By: | Joshua William Carden |
| 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: CBOCS Incorporated | |
| 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.
