Gardner v. City of Berkeley
| Timothy Gardner |
| City of Berkeley |
| 3:2018cv07784 |
| December 28, 2018 |
| US District Court for the Northern District of California |
| Vince Chhabria |
| Civil Rights: Jobs |
| 29 U.S.C. ยง 0794 |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on May 13, 2021. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 4
Initial Case Management Scheduling Order with ADR Deadlines: This case is assigned to a judge who participates in the Cameras in the Courtroom Pilot Project. See General Order 65 and http://cand.uscourts.gov/cameras This case may fall within the Pilot Program for Initial Discovery Protocols for Employment Cases Alleging Adverse Action. See #General Order 71. Parties and Counsel are directed t o review General Order 71 to determine whether it applies to this case, and to comply with that General Order if applicable. Case Management Statement due by 3/26/2019. Initial Case Management Conference set for 4/2/2019 01:30 PM. Signed by Judge Vince Chhabria on 12/28/18. (Attachments: #1 Notice of Eligibility)(aaaS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 12/28/2018)
|
| Filing 3 Case assigned to Judge Vince Chhabria. Counsel for plaintiff or the removing party is responsible for serving the Complaint or Notice of Removal, Summons and the assigned judge's standing orders and all other new case documents upon the opposing parties. For information, visit E-Filing A New Civil Case at http://cand.uscourts.gov/ecf/caseopening.Standing orders can be downloaded from the court's web page at www.cand.uscourts.gov/judges. Upon receipt, the summons will be issued and returned electronically. Counsel is required to send chambers a copy of the initiating documents pursuant to L.R. 5-1(e)(7). A scheduling order will be sent by Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF) within two business days. (bwS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 12/28/2018) |
| Answer to #1 Removal Complaint (Page 49); byCity of Berkeley. (aaaS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 12/28/2018) |
| Filing 2 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE by City of Berkeley re #1 Notice of Removal, (Amended) (Hartinger, Arthur) (Filed on 12/28/2018) |
| Filing 1 NOTICE OF REMOVAL OF ACTION UNDER 28 U.S.C. 1441(a); (NO PROCESS); BY DEFENDANT CITY OF BERKELEY from Superior Court of California, County of Alameda. Their case number is RG18931464. (Filing fee $400 receipt number 0971-12960182). Filed byCity of Berkeley. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet)(Hartinger, Arthur) (Filed on 12/28/2018) Modified on 12/31/2018 (aaaS, COURT STAFF). |
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 Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
| Search for this case: Gardner v. City of Berkeley | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Defendant: City of Berkeley | |
| Represented By: | Arthur A. Hartinger |
| Represented By: | Natalie Silva Torres |
| 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 ] |
| Plaintiff: Timothy Gardner | |
| Represented By: | Lawrence Dale Murray |
| 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.
