Rodriguez v. U.S. Department of Homeland Security et. al.

Case Number: 4:2005cv00546
Filed: September 8, 2005
Court: Arizona District Court
Office: Tucson Division Office
Presiding Judge: Cindy K Jorgenson
Nature of Suit: Federal Employer's Liability
Cause of Action: 05:7703 Discrimination - Review of Agency Act
Jury Demanded By: Plaintiff

Available Case Documents

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

Date Filed#Document Text
April 13, 2009 235 Opinion or Order of the Court ORDER denying 216 Motion for New Trial; denying 217 Motion from relief from taxation of costs. Deft is entitled the costs in the amount of $5065.95 as set forth in the amended notice of filing bill of taxable costs. Signed by Judge Cindy K Jorgenson on 04/10/09.(LMF, ) Modified 4/13/2009 to add with opinion (LMF, ).
November 26, 2008 191 Opinion or Order of the Court ORDER finding evidence regarding Lawrence and Mendez is admissible at trial. (CKJ)
October 22, 2008 173 Opinion or Order of the Court ORDER granting in part and denying in part 151 Motion in Limine ; granting in part and denying in part 154 Motion in Limine Re: Employment Evidence Not Related to the Border Patrol; granting in part and denying in part 155 Motion in Limine Re: Marital Status; granting in part and denying in part 156 Motion in Limine Re: Unrelated Acts.. Signed by Judge Cindy K Jorgenson on 10/22/08.(JKM, )

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: Rodriguez v. U.S. Department of Homeland Security et. al.
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ 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?