Crow v. Kuumba Made Incorporated
Heather Crow |
Kuumba Made Incorporated |
4:2019cv00254 |
May 6, 2019 |
US District Court for the District of Arizona |
Bruce G Macdonald |
Civil Rights: Jobs |
42 U.S.C. ยง 2000 e |
Plaintiff |
Docket Report
This docket was last retrieved on July 2, 2019. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
Document Text |
---|
Filing 11 STIPULATION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO ANSWER COMPLAINT by Kuumba Made Incorporated. (Attachments: #1 Text of Proposed Order)(Nash, Jeanna) |
Filing 10 NOTICE of Appearance by Jeanna Chandler Nash on behalf of Kuumba Made Incorporated. (Nash, Jeanna) |
Filing 9 SERVICE EXECUTED filed by Heather Crow: Rule 4 Waiver of Service of Summons. Waiver sent on May 8, 2019 to Kuumba Made, Inc. . (Giles, Shannon) |
Filing 8 Agreement to Magistrate Judge Jurisdiction. Party agrees to Magistrate Judge Jurisdiction. This is a TEXT ENTRY ONLY. There is no PDF document associated with this entry. (BAC) |
Filing 6 Magistrate Election Form Deadline resent on this date (BAC) |
Filing 5 Summons Issued as to Kuumba Made Incorporated. (DLC). *** IMPORTANT: When printing the summons, select "Document and stamps" or "Document and comments" for the seal to appear on the document. |
Filing 4 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. (DLC) |
Filing 3 Filing fee paid, receipt number 0970-16875333. This case has been assigned to the Honorable Bruce G Macdonald. All future pleadings or documents should bear the correct case number: CV-19-254-TUC-BGM. Magistrate Election form attached. (DLC) |
Filing 2 SUMMONS Submitted by Heather Crow. (Giles, Shannon) (DLC) |
Filing 1 COMPLAINT. Filing fee received: $ 400.00, receipt number 0970-16875333 filed by Heather Crow. (Giles, Shannon) (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet)(DLC) |
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: Crow v. Kuumba Made Incorporated | |
---|---|
Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
Plaintiff: Heather Crow | |
Represented By: | Donald T Awerkamp |
Represented By: | Ivelisse Bonilla-Torrado |
Represented By: | Shannon Lori Giles |
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: Kuumba Made Incorporated | |
Represented By: | Jeanna Chandler Nash |
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.