Taylor v. Department of the Air Force et al
Plaintiff: Karen M. Taylor
Defendant: Department of the Air Force and Michael W. Wynne
Case Number: 2:2008cv00869
Filed: April 24, 2008
Court: US District Court for the Eastern District of California
Office: Federal Employer's Liability Office
County: Sacramento
Presiding Judge: Dale A. Drozd
Presiding Judge: John A. Mendez
Nature of Suit: Plaintiff
Cause of Action: U.S. Government Defendant
Jury Demanded By: 28:1331 Fed. Question: Personal Injury

Available Case Documents

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

Date Filed Document Text
January 31, 2012 Opinion or Order Filing 67 FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Dale A. Drozd on 1/30/2012 RECOMMENDING that Defendant's 3/11/2011 motion for summary judgment 56 be granted. This action be dismissed. Motion referred to Judge John A. Mendez. Objections to F&R due within 7 days. (Zignago, K.)
May 25, 2011 Opinion or Order Filing 66 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Dale A. Drozd on 5/24/11, ORDERING that Final Pretrial Conference set for 6/17/11, and Jury Trial set for 8/15/11, before the Honorable John A. Mendez are VACATED, and no pretrial statements shall be filed by the parties until further order of the court. (Kastilahn, A)
April 11, 2011 Opinion or Order Filing 62 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Dale A. Drozd on 4/9/11 ORDERING Defendant shall comply with the requirements of Local Rule 260(a) by filing and serving a "Statement of Undisputed Facts" w/in seven days after April 8, 2011; the filing shal l be accompanied by a proof of service by mail on the pro se plaintiff; Defendant shall provide the court with a courtesy copy, in either paper or electronic format, of the entire deposition relied upon in defendant's motion for summary judgment , as provided in Local Rule 133(j), within seven days after April 8, 2011; Plaintiff's response to defendant's Statement of Undisputed Facts shall be prepared in accordance with Local Rule 260(b) and shall be filed and served within fourtee n days after plaintiff is served with defendant's Statement of Undisputed Facts; Plaintiff's January 3, 2011 request for change of date and place of deposition (Doc. No. 54) is denied as moot; and Plaintiff's February 4, 2011 request for court-ordered designation of experts by defendant (Doc. No. 55) is denied.(Matson, R)
November 30, 2010 Opinion or Order Filing 53 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Dale A. Drozd on 11/30/10, ORDERING that 52 dft's motion to modify the pre-trial scheduling order is GRANTED. The deadline for dft to designate experts is 1/21/11, all discovery shall be completed by 2/18/11, and all law and motion shall be completed by 4/8/11. All remaining dates and deadlines as set by the 5/11/10 status (pretrial scheduling)order remain as set and are otherwise unaffected by this order. (Kastilahn, A)
May 11, 2010 Opinion or Order Filing 49 STATUS ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Dale A. Drozd on 5/10/10 ORDERING all law and motion, except as to discovery, shall be conducted so as to be completed by 3/4/11; Discovery due by 1/14/2011; Final Pretrial Conference set for 6/17/2011 at 02:00 PM in Courtroom 6 (JAM) before Judge John A. Mendez; Jury Trial set for 8/15/2011 at 09:00 AM in Courtroom 6 (JAM) before Judge John A. Mendez; this order shall not be modified except by leave of court upon showing of show cause. (Carlos, K)
March 26, 2010 Opinion or Order Filing 45 ORDER signed by Judge John A. Mendez on 3/26/10 ADOPTING 43 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS in full; Defendant's 35 Motion for partial Dismissal of claims is GRANTED ; All claims alleged under the Family Medical Leave Act, the Americans with Disabilities Act, 42 USC 1981 and 1983, and the Fourteenth Amendment are DISMISSED with prejudice. This action shall proceed on the claims alleged in plaintiff's second amended complaint under Title VII and the Rehabilitation Act. (Donati, J)
January 26, 2009 Opinion or Order Filing 27 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Dale A. Drozd on 01/26/09 GRANTING 15 Motion to Dismiss WITH LEAVE TO AMENDED; and GRANTING 24 Motion to Strike and the documents attached to plaintiff's opposition brief 21 are deemed STRICKEN. Plaintiff&# 039;s second amended complaint shall be served on defendants' counsel and filed with the court on or before March 6, 2009; and Defendants' response to plaintiff's second amended complaint shall be filed and served within 20 days after served of the amended complaint. (Streeter, J)
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 California Eastern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Taylor v. Department of the Air Force et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Karen M. Taylor
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: Department of the Air Force
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: Michael W. Wynne
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?