Harris v. United Parcel Service, Inc. et al.,
| Mark Harris |
| United Parcel Service, Inc., Tony Agenjo and Kimberly Muniz |
| 3:2008cv01810 |
| April 3, 2008 |
| US District Court for the Northern District of California |
| Civil Rights: Jobs Office |
| Alameda |
| Jeffrey S. White |
| None |
| Federal Question |
| 28:1441 Petition for Removal - Employment Discrimination |
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
97
Judgment. Signed by Judge Jeffrey S. White on July 1, 2009. (jswlc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 7/1/2009)
|
|
Filing
91
Notice of Questions. Signed by Judge Jeffrey S. White on May 7, 2009. (jswlc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 5/7/2009)
|
|
Filing
66
ORDER GRANTING 64 Stipulation To Extend Discovery Cut-Off Date. Signed by Judge Jeffrey S. White on 3/24/09. (jjo, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 3/24/2009)
|
|
Filing
48
ORDER SETTING BRIEFING SCHEDULE re 45 Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff's Third Amended Complaint. Signed by Judge Jeffrey S. White on 1/12/09. (jjo, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 1/12/2009)
|
|
Filing
43
INITIAL DISCOVERY ORDER. Signed by Magistrate Judge Bernard Zimmerman on 1/6/2009. (bzsec, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 1/6/2009)
|
|
Filing
39
ORDER by Judge Jeffrey S. White granting 33 Motion to Dismiss (jswlc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 12/4/2008)
|
|
Filing
36
ORDER SETTING BRIEFING SCHEDULE. Signed by Judge Jeffrey S. White on 9/25/08. (jjo, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 9/25/2008)
|
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 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.
