Steck v. Alpha Dyno Nobel et al
| Jacob Steck |
| Alpha Dyno Nobel and Dyno Nobel, Inc. |
| 2:2023cv00614 |
| March 31, 2023 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of California |
| Kendall J Newman |
| Labor: Fair Standards |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on October 16, 2023. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 5 MINUTE ORDER issued by Courtroom Deputy for Chief Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 5/25/2023 GRANTING the Defendants' Motion for Extension of Time (ECF No. #4 ). Defendants shall have through and including 6/21/2023 to respond to Named Plaintiff's Complaint (ECF No. #1 ). (Text Only Entry) (Waldrop, A) |
| Filing 4 MOTION for EXTENSION of TIME to FILE ANSWER re #1 Complaint by Alpha Dyno Nobel, Dyno Nobel, Inc. Attorney Crockett, David K. added. (Crockett, David) |
| Filing 3 CIVIL NEW CASE DOCUMENTS ISSUED; (Attachments: #1 Consent Form, #2 VDRP) (Reader, L) |
| Filing 2 SUMMONS ISSUED as to *Alpha Dyno Nobel, Dyno Nobel, Inc.* with answer to complaint due within *21* days. Attorney *Joshua H. Watson* *Clayeo C. Arnold, PC* *865 Howe Avenue* *Sacramento, California 95825*. (Reader, L) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT against All Defendants by Jacob Steck. Attorney Watson, Joshua H. added. (Filing fee $ 402, receipt number ACAEDC-10779243) (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet)(Watson, Joshua) |
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 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.
