Lockette v. Ross Stores, Inc. et al
Plaintiff: Toressa Lockette
Defendant: Ross Stores, Inc. and Ross Dress for Less Stores
Case Number: 3:2007cv03430
Filed: June 29, 2007
Court: US District Court for the Northern District of California
Office: San Francisco Office
County: Los Angeles
Presiding Judge: Maxine M. Chesney
Nature of Suit: Labor: Fair Standards
Cause of Action: 29 U.S.C. ยง 201 Fair Labor Standards Act
Jury Demanded By: Plaintiff

Available Case Documents

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

Date Filed Document Text
June 4, 2010 Opinion or Order Filing 70 ORDER RE: MODIFICATION OF SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT TO PROVIDE FOR CY PRES CONTRIBUTIONS TO AGREED CHARITY. Signed by Judge Maxine M. Chesney on June 4, 2010. (mmclc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 6/4/2010)
December 18, 2008 Opinion or Order Filing 57 ORDER EXTENDING DEADLINE TO SUBMIT CLAIMS AND DEADLINE TO FILE MOTION FOR FINAL APPROVAL OF SETTLEMENT; CONTINUING HEARING ON MOTION FOR FINAL APPROVAL OF SETTLEMENT; APPROVING PROPOSED NOTICES TO CLASS; DIRECTIONS TO PARTIES. The deadline for claima nts to submit a Consent and Claim Form is extended from January 9, 2009 to February 9, 2009. The deadline to file a motion for final approval of the settlement is extended from January 23, 2009 to February 23, 2009. The hearing on the motion for fina l approval is continued from February 6, 2009 to March 6, 2009, at 9:00 a.m. The proposed "Supplemental Notice of Proposed Class Action Settlement and Final Fairness and Approval Hearing" is approved, and the parties are directed to mail, n o later than December 29, 2008, such notice to potential claimants who have not yet returned a Consent and Claim Form. The proposed "Notice Re: Continued Hearing Date" is approved, with the exception that the parties are directed to amend such notice to correctly identify the case number of the instant matter; the parties are directed to mail, no later than December 29, 2008, such notice to the claimants who have returned a Consent and Claim Form. Signed by Judge Maxine M. Chesney on December 18, 2008. (mmclc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 12/18/2008)
December 8, 2008 Opinion or Order Filing 55 ORDER AFFORDING PARTIES LEAVE TO SUPPLEMENT JOINT STIPULATION RE: CLAIMS PERIOD AND COURT DATES. The parties are afforded leave to supplement their stipulation by filing, no later than December 18, 2008, the proposed notice they intend to send to the claimants. Signed by Judge Maxine M. Chesney on December 8, 2008. (mmclc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 12/8/2008)
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 Northern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Lockette v. Ross Stores, Inc. 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: Toressa Lockette
Represented By: Moses Mark Yenikomshian
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: Ross Stores, Inc.
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: Ross Dress for Less Stores
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?