Horn v. Experis US Inc., a Manpower Brand Company
| Ella W. Horn |
| Experis US Inc., a Manpower Brand Company |
| 2:2017cv00814 |
| April 18, 2017 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of California |
| Sacramento Office |
| Sacramento |
| Deborah Barnes |
| John A. Mendez |
| Employment |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 |
| 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
47
ORDER ADOPTING 44 Findings and Recommendations in full signed by District Judge John A. Mendez on 10/07/19 GRANTING defendant's 24 Motion for Summary Judgment. CASE CLOSED (Benson, A.)
|
|
Filing
44
ORDER AND FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Deborah Barnes on 7/2/2019 VACATING 39 Findings and Recommendations, and DENYING 37 Motion to Strike. RECOMMENDING 24 that motion for summary judgment be granted, judgment be entered for defendant and this action be closed. Referred to Judge John A. Mendez, and Objections due within 14 days after being served with these F & R's.(Reader, L)
|
|
Filing
39
FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Deborah Barnes on 5/28/19 DENYING 37 Motion to Strike and further RECOMMENDING that 24 Motion for Summary Judgment be Granted as to the complaint's Title VVI claims; that Judgment be entered for defendant as to the complaint's Title VII claims; that the court decline to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over the complaint's state law claims; that the complaint's state law claims be Dismissed without prejudice; and that this action be Closed. Referred to Judge John A. Mendez. Objections due within 14 days after being served with these findings and recommendations. (Coll, A)
|
|
Filing
27
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Deborah Barnes on 12/21/18 DENYING 26 Motion to Stay; CONTINUING the 24 Motion for summary judgment Hearing to 2/1/2019 at 10:00 AM in Courtroom 27 (DB) before Magistrate Judge Deborah Barnes; and DIRECTING plaintiff to file a statement of opposition or non-opposition to 24 Motion for Summary Judgment. (Coll, A)
|
|
Filing
23
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Deborah Barnes on 10/11/2018 GRANTING retroactive to 1/1/20181 21 motion for exempt fee status. Plaintiff is EXEMPT from fees for PACER in this action; Plaintiff's exemption applies ONLY to plaintiff� 39;s online PACER account and not to documents obtained at the Public Counter. The Clerk of the Court shall notify the PACER Service Center; Plaintiff shall contact the PACER Service Center to establish a PACER account; and Plaintiff's fee exemption shall remain in effect for 30 days after the termination of this action. (cc: PACER Service.) (York, M)
|
|
Filing
19
STATUS PRETRIAL SCHEDULING ORDER signed by Judge Deborah Barnes on 03/09/2018 ORDERING that the parties shall make initial disclosures under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26 no later than 28 days from the date of the 3/9/2018 hearing; Designation o f Plaintiff's Expert Witnesses due by 09/14/2018 with any rebuttal expert disclosures by 10/12/2018; Designation of Defendant's Expert Witnesses due by 09/28/2018; Discovery due by 11/09/2018; Dispositive Motions to be completed by 12/28/2018; Final Pretrial Conference set for 3/8/2019 at 11:00 AM in Courtroom 6 (JAM) before Judge John A. Mendez; Jury Trial set for 4/29/2019 at 9:00 AM in Courtroom 6 (JAM) before Judge John A. Mendez. (Fabillaran, J)
|
|
Filing
11
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Deborah Barnes on 1/22/18: Status (Pretrial Scheduling) Conference set for 3/9/2018 at 10:00 AM in Courtroom 27 (DB) before Magistrate Judge Deborah Barnes. Plaintiff shall file and serve a status report on or before February 23, 2018, and defendant shall file and serve a status report on or before March 2, 2018. (Kaminski, H)
|
|
Filing
3
ORDER DIRECTING SERVICE signed by Magistrate Judge Deborah Barnes on 9/25/2017 ORDERING 2 Plaintiff's Motion to Proceed IFP is GRANTED; The Clerk of the Court is directed to issue process and to send plaintiff an instruction sheet for service of process by the United States Marshal; Within 30 days after this order is served, plaintiff shall submit to the USM a properly completed USM-285 form, summons, and the number of copies of the endorsed complaint and of this order required by the USM ; Within 10 days after submitting the required materials to the USM, plaintiff shall file with this court a declaration stating the date on which she submitted the required documents to the USM; Within 30 days after receiving the necessary materials from plaintiff, the USM is directed to serve process on defendant Experis US Inc., without prepayment of costs. (Reader, L)
|
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
| Search for this case: Horn v. Experis US Inc., a Manpower Brand Company | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Plaintiff: Ella W. Horn | |
| 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: Experis US Inc., a Manpower Brand Company | |
| 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.
