Hartwick v. City Of San Jose
Plaintiff: David Hartwick
Defendant: City Of San Jose
Case Number: 3:2020cv05922
Filed: August 23, 2020
Court: US District Court for the Northern District of California
Presiding Judge: Virginia K DeMarchi
Referring Judge: William H Orrick
Nature of Suit: American with Disabilities - Employment
Cause of Action: 42 U.S.C. ยง 12101
Jury Demanded By: Both
Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on October 14, 2020. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
October 14, 2020 Opinion or Order Filing 19 ORDER granting #18 STIPULATION re #11 MOTION to Dismiss. Response due by 11/10/2020. Repliy due by 11/20/2020. Motion Hearing reset for 1/13/2021 02:00 PM in San Francisco, Courtroom 02, 17th Floor before Judge William H. Orrick. Signed by Judge William H. Orrick on 10/14/2020. (jmdS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 10/14/2020)
October 12, 2020 Filing 18 STIPULATION WITH PROPOSED ORDER re #11 MOTION to Dismiss filed by David Hartwick. (Attachments: #1 Proposed Order Continue Hearing)(Ratner, David) (Filed on 10/12/2020)
October 5, 2020 Filing 17 CLERKS NOTICE SETTING ZOOM HEARING. Hearing for #11 Motion to Dismiss reset for 11/18/2020 02:00 PM before Judge William H. Orrick. This proceeding will be held via Zoom webinar.Webinar Access: All counsel, members of the public, and media may access the webinar information at #https://www.cand.uscourts.gov/who General Order 58. Persons granted access to court proceedings held by telephone or videoc onference are reminded that photographing, recording, and rebroadcasting of court proceedings, including screenshots or other visual copying of a hearing, is absolutely prohibited.Zoom Guidance and Setup: #https://www.cand.uscourts.gov/zoom/. (This is a text-only entry generated by the court. There is no document associated with this entry.) (jmdS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 10/5/2020)
October 5, 2020 Opinion or Order Filing 16 CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE ORDER - Case Management Conference reset for 12/8/2020 02:00 PM. Case Management Statement due by 12/1/2020. Signed by Judge William H. Orrick on 10/5/2020. (jmdS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 10/5/2020)
October 1, 2020 Filing 15 Case REASSIGNED to Judge William H. Orrick. Notice: The assigned judge participates in the Cameras in the Courtroom Pilot Project. See General Order No. 65 and http://cand.uscourts.gov/cameras. Magistrate Judge Virginia K. DeMarchi no longer assigned to the case. (Attachments: #1 Notice of Eligibility for Video Recording) (bwS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 10/1/2020)
October 1, 2020 Filing 14 This case will be randomly reassigned to a District Judge outside the San Jose Division pursuant to the Caseload Rebalancing Pilot Program approved by the Court effective March 1, 2018. For information, visit our web page at #http://cand.uscourts.gov/news/225. (bwS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 10/1/2020)
October 1, 2020 Opinion or Order Filing 13 ORDER For Reassignment to a District Judge. Signed by Magistrate Judge Virginia K. DeMarchi on 10/1/2020. (vkdlc2S, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 10/1/2020)
September 23, 2020 Filing 12 CLERK'S SECOND NOTICE Re: Consent or Declination: Plaintiffs shall file a consent or declination to proceed before a magistrate judge. Note that any party is free to withhold consent to proceed before a magistrate judge without adverse substantive consequences. The forms are available at: http://cand.uscourts.gov/civilforms. Consent/Declination due by 9/29/2020. (pmcS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 9/23/2020)
September 22, 2020 Filing 11 MOTION to Dismiss filed by City Of San Jose. Motion Hearing set for 11/17/2020 10:00 AM in San Jose, Courtroom 2, 5th Floor before Magistrate Judge Virginia K. DeMarchi. Responses due by 10/6/2020. Replies due by 10/13/2020. (Zoglin, Kathryn) (Filed on 9/22/2020)
September 22, 2020 Filing 10 CONSENT/DECLINATION to Proceed Before a US Magistrate Judge by City Of San Jose.. (Zoglin, Kathryn) (Filed on 9/22/2020)
September 15, 2020 Filing 9 DEMAND for Trial by Jury by City Of San Jose. (Zoglin, Kathryn) (Filed on 9/15/2020)
September 9, 2020 Filing 8 CLERK'S NOTICE Re: Consent or Declination: Plaintiffs/Defendants shall file a consent or declination to proceed before a magistrate judge. Note that any party is free to withhold consent to proceed before a magistrate judge without adverse substantive consequences. The forms are available at: http://cand.uscourts.gov/civilforms. Consent/Declination due by 9/23/2020. (pmcS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 9/9/2020)
August 24, 2020 Filing 7 NOTICE of Appearance by David S. Ratner (Ratner, David) (Filed on 8/24/2020)
August 24, 2020 Filing 6 Summons Issued as to City Of San Jose. (dhmS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 8/24/2020)
August 24, 2020 Filing 5 Initial Case Management Scheduling Order with ADR Deadlines: This case may fall within the Initial Discovery Protocols for Employment Cases Alleging Adverse Action. See #General Order 71. Parties and Counsel are directed to 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 11/17/20 20. Initial Case Management Conference set for 11/24/2020 01:30 PM in San Jose, Courtroom 2, 5th Floor. (dhmS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 8/24/2020)
August 24, 2020 Filing 4 Case assigned to Magistrate Judge Virginia K. DeMarchi. 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. Consent/Declination due by 9/8/2020. (anjS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 8/24/2020)
August 24, 2020 Filing 3 DEMAND for Trial by Jury by David Hartwick. (Ratner, David) (Filed on 8/24/2020)
August 24, 2020 #Electronic filing error. Counsel Failed to Enter Defendant's name on to Docket. Corrected by Clerk's Office. No further action is necessary. Re: #1 Complaint filed by D avid Hartwick (dhmS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 8/24/2020)
August 23, 2020 Filing 2 Proposed Summons. (Ratner, David) (Filed on 8/23/2020)
August 23, 2020 Filing 1 COMPLAINT against All Defendants ( Filing fee $ 400, receipt number 0971-14850218.). Filed byDavid Hartwick. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet)(Ratner, David) (Filed on 8/23/2020)

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: Hartwick v. City Of San Jose
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: David Hartwick
Represented By: David S. Ratner
Represented By: Shelley A. Molineaux
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: City Of San Jose
Represented By: Kathryn Jennifer Zoglin
Represented By: Benjamin Ardell Johnson
Represented By: Nora Valerie Frimann
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?