Arroyo v. FedEx Ground Package System, Inc.
| Mayra Arroyo |
| FedEx Ground Package System, Inc. |
| 2:2024cv02614 |
| September 27, 2024 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of California |
| Dale A Drozd |
| Sean C Riordan |
| Civil Rights: Jobs |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1441 Petition for Removal - Employment Discrimination |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on October 11, 2024. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 8 NOTICE of APPEARANCE by Julienne Alexis Dolorfin Correa on behalf of FedEx Ground Package System, Inc.. Attorney Correa, Julienne Alexis Dolorfin added. (Correa, Julienne) |
| Filing 7 CIVIL NEW CASE DOCUMENTS ISSUED; Initial Scheduling Conference set for 2/10/2025 at 01:30 PM in Courtroom 4 (DAD) before District Judge Dale A. Drozd. (Attachments: #1 Standing Order, #2 Consent Form, #3 VDRP) (Kyono, V) |
| Filing 6 CLERK'S NOTICE REASSIGNING CASE (TEXT ONLY). This case has been assigned to District Judge Dale A. Drozd and Magistrate Judge Sean C. Riordan. The new case number is: 2:24-cv-2614 DAD SCR. (Kyono, V) |
| Filing 5 CONSENT/DECLINE of U.S. Magistrate Judge Jurisdiction. Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 73(b)(1), this document is restricted to attorneys and court staff only. Judges do not have access to view this document and will be informed of a party's response only if all parties have consented to the referral. (Blueford, Gregory) |
| Filing 4 CONSENT/DECLINE of U.S. Magistrate Judge Jurisdiction. Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 73(b)(1), this document is restricted to attorneys and court staff only. Judges do not have access to view this document and will be informed of a party's response only if all parties have consented to the referral. (Idrees, Kasim) |
| Filing 3 CERTIFICATE / PROOF of SERVICE by FedEx Ground Package System, Inc. re #1 Notice of Removal, #2 Civil New Case Documents for Magistrate as Presider. (Blueford, Gregory) |
| Filing 2 CIVIL NEW CASE DOCUMENTS ISSUED; (Attachments: #1 Consent Form, #2 VDRP) (Mendez Licea, O) |
| Filing 1 NOTICE of REMOVAL from San Joaquin County Superior Court, case number STK-CV-UWT-2024-0010588 by FedEx Ground Package System, Inc.. (Filing fee $ 405, receipt number ACAEDC-11775431) (Attachments: #1 Declaration of Selena M. Smith, #2 Corporate Disclosure Statement, #3 Certificate of Interested Parties, #4 Civil Cover Sheet) (Blueford, Gregory) |
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
| Search for this case: Arroyo v. FedEx Ground Package System, Inc. | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Plaintiff: Mayra Arroyo | |
| Represented By: | Kasim Idrees |
| 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: FedEx Ground Package System, Inc. | |
| Represented By: | Gregory L. Blueford |
| Represented By: | Julienne Alexis Dolorfin Correa |
| 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.
