Escobar v. JP Morgan Chase Bank et al
| Elizabeth Escobar |
| JP Morgan Chase Bank and Delinda Woltring |
| 2:2011cv03423 |
| December 22, 2011 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of California |
| Sacramento Office |
| Sacramento |
| Edmund F. Brennan |
| Garland E. Burrell |
| Employment |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 451 |
| Plaintiff |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
14
STATUS (PRETRIAL SCHEDULING) ORDER signed by Judge Garland E. Burrell, Jr on 6/29/12: Discovery due by 7/9/2013. Dispositive Motions filed by 9/9/2013. Final Pretrial Conference set for 11/4/2013 at 02:30 PM in Courtroom 10 (GEB) before Judge Garland E. Burrell Jr.. Trial set for 2/11/2014 at 09:00 AM in Courtroom 10 (GEB) before Judge Garland E. Burrell Jr.. (Kaminski, H)
|
|
Filing
11
ORDER to SHOW CAUSE signed by Judge Garland E. Burrell, Jr on 6/19/12 ORDERING that the parties Show Cause in writing no later than 6/25/2012 why sanctions should not be imposed for failure to file a timely status report; Status Conference reset for 7/9/2012 at 09:00 AM in Courtroom 10 (GEB) before Judge Garland E. Burrell Jr. Status report due no later than 14 days prior to conference. (Manzer, C)
|
|
Filing
10
ORDER signed by Judge Garland E. Burrell, Jr. on 4/27/2012. Plaintiff failed to respond to 3/29/2012 9 Order by deadline. Therefore, defendant Delinda Woltring is DISMISSED from this action without prejudice. (Marciel, M)
|
|
Filing
9
ORDER signed by Judge Garland E. Burrell, Jr on 3/28/12 CONTINUING Status (Pretrial Scheduling) Conference to 6/25/2012 at 09:00 AM in Courtroom 10 (GEB) before Judge Garland E. Burrell Jr. A further joint status report shall be filed no later than 14 days prior to the Status Conference. Further, Plaintiff is notified under Rule 4(m) of the FRCP ("Rule 4(m)") that failure to serve Defendant Delinda Woltring with process within the 120 day period prescribed in that Rule may result in the unserved defendant being dismissed. To avoid dismissal, on or before 4/23/12, Plaintiff shall file proof of service for this defendant or a sufficient explanation why service was not effected within Rule 4(m)'s prescribed service period. (Meuleman, A)
|
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 Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
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.
