Mosley v. Amazon.com Incorporated
Roxanne M Mosley |
Amazon.com Incorporated |
2:2022cv01308 |
August 4, 2022 |
US District Court for the District of Arizona |
Douglas L Rayes |
Personal Injury: Other |
28 U.S.C. ยง 1441 Petition for Removal- Breach of Contract |
Plaintiff |
Docket Report
This docket was last retrieved on October 11, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
Document Text |
---|
Filing 17 RESPONSE re: #16 Notice (Other), #15 Notice (Other) by Defendant Amazon.com Incorporated. (Waltman, Joshua) |
Filing 16 NOTICE: Subming the Dictionary Meaning of the Word Shift, Per Contract by Roxanne M Mosley. (LAD) (5 pages) |
Filing 15 NOTICE: Being Forced Out of Employment by Roxanne M Mosley. (LAD) (10 pages) |
Filing 14 REPLY to Response to Motion re: #8 MOTION to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim and Incorporated Memorandum of Law in Support of Motion to Dismiss filed by Amazon.com Incorporated. (Gutierrez, Carlos) |
Filing 13 RESPONSE to #8 MOTION to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim and Incorporated Memorandum of Law in Support of Motion to Dismiss filed by Roxanne M Mosley. (Part 1) (Attachments: #1 Part 2, #2 Part 3, #3 Part 4, #4 Part 5, #5 Part 6, #6 Part 7)(CLM) |
Filing 12 ORDER: Plaintiff, who is self-represented, has requested a 4-month extension of time in which to respond to Defendant's motion to dismiss. The Court does not find good cause for a 4-month extension. But the Court will extend Plaintiff's deadline by an additional 14 days, which should be adequate time for Plaintiff to perform her research and respond to the arguments Defendant has raised. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiff's #11 motion for an extension of time is granted in part. Plaintiff's response to Defendant's #8 motion to dismiss shall be due by no later than 9/9/2022. Ordered by Judge Douglas L Rayes on 8/19/2022. This is a TEXT ENTRY ONLY. There is no PDF document associated with this entry. (MMO) |
Filing 11 MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response as to #8 MOTION to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim and Incorporated Memorandum of Law in Support of Motion to Dismiss by Roxanne M Mosley. (LAD) (1 page, entitled Computing and Extending Time; Time for Motion Papers 1,440 hours) |
Filing 10 REQUEST BY NON-PRISONER PRO SE PARTY FOR ELECTRONIC NOTICING filed by Roxanne M Mosley. Pro se parties must promptly notify the Clerks Office, in writing, if there is a change in designated e-mail address or mailing address. (BAS) |
Filing 9 RESPONSE in Opposition re: #7 MOTION to Deny Transfer of This Case filed by Amazon.com Incorporated. (Waltman, Joshua) |
Filing 8 MOTION to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim and Incorporated Memorandum of Law in Support of Motion to Dismiss by Amazon.com Incorporated. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A - Certificate of Conferral Regarding Defendant's Motion to Dismiss Complaint)(Waltman, Joshua) |
Filing 7 MOTION to Deny Transfer of This Case by Roxanne M Mosley. (LAD) (9 pages) |
Filing 6 ORDER that motions pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6) or 12(c) are discouraged if the defect can be cured by filing an amended pleading. The parties must meet and confer prior to the filing of such motions 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. See attached Order for complete details. Signed by Judge Douglas L. Rayes on 8/5/2022. (ESG) |
Filing 5 NOTICE of Errata re: #1 Notice of Removal, Exhibit 2 by Defendant Amazon.com Incorporated.. (Gutierrez, Carlos) |
Filing 4 NOTICE TO SELF-REPRESENTED LITIGANT re informational documents attached: (1) Notice to Self-Represented Litigant, (2) Federal Court Self-Service Clinic Flyer, (3) Fed. R. Civ. P. 5.2, and (4) Notice and Request re Electronic Noticing. (MCO) |
Filing 3 Filing fee paid, receipt number AAZDC-20955221. This case has been assigned to the Honorable Douglas L Rayes. All future pleadings or documents should bear the correct case number: CV-22-1308-PHX-DLR. Notice of Availability of Magistrate Judge to Exercise Jurisdiction form attached. (MCO) |
Filing 2 Corporate Disclosure Statement by Amazon.com Incorporated identifying Corporate Parent Amazon.com Services LLC, Corporate Parent Amazon.com Sales Incorporated for Amazon.com Incorporated. (Gutierrez, Carlos) (MCO) |
Filing 1 NOTICE OF REMOVAL from Maricopa County Superior Court, case number CV2022-008062. Filing fee received: $ 402.00, receipt number AAZDC-20955221 filed by Amazon.com Incorporated. (Gutierrez, Carlos) (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet, #2 Supplemental Civil Cover Sheet, #3 Exhibit, #4 Exhibit, #5 Exhibit, #6 Exhibit, #7 Exhibit)(MCO) |
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: Mosley v. Amazon.com Incorporated | |
---|---|
Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
Plaintiff: Roxanne M Mosley | |
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: Amazon.com Incorporated | |
Represented By: | Carlos B Gutierrez |
Represented By: | Joshua Lee Waltman |
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.