James v. FedEx Office and Print Services, Inc. et al
Plaintiff: Jennifer James
Defendant: FedEx Office and Print Services, Inc. and Does 1-10
Case Number: 3:2024cv00374
Filed: February 26, 2024
Court: US District Court for the Southern District of California
Presiding Judge: David D Leshner
Referring Judge: Dana M Sabraw
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights: Jobs
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 1441 ed Removal - Employment Discrimination
Jury Demanded By: Both
Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on March 6, 2024. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
March 6, 2024 Filing 7 Minute Entry Vacating Early Neutral Evaluation (ENE) and Case Management Conference (CMC). The April 9, 2024 ENE and CMC are vacated pursuant to the Court's order staying the case [Dkt. No. 6]. (no document attached) (src)
March 5, 2024 Opinion or Order Filing 6 ORDER on #5 joint motion to submit matter to binding arbitration and stay action pursuant to Local Rule 7.2. Signed by Chief District Judge Dana M. Sabraw on 3/05/2024. (jpp) (rmc).
March 5, 2024 Filing 5 Joint MOTION to Stay to Submit Matter to Binding Arbitration and Stay Action Pursuant to LR 7.2 by FedEx Office and Print Services, Inc.. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A - Mutual Arbitration Agreement)(Nageotte, Kyle) (jpp).
February 28, 2024 Filing 4 NOTICE AND ORDER setting Early Neutral Evaluation Conference; Rule 26 Compliance; and Case Management Conference. Early Neutral Evaluation set for 4/9/2024 at 2:00pm. Joint Discovery Plan due 3/26/2024. Signed by Chief District Judge Dana M. Sabraw on 2/28/2024.(jpp) (rmc).
February 26, 2024 Filing 3 NOTICE of Party With Financial Interest by FedEx Office and Print Services, Inc.. Identifying Corporate Parent Fedex Corporation for FedEx Office and Print Services, Inc.. (rxc) (jms).
February 26, 2024 Filing 2 ANSWER to Complaint (Notice of Removal) by FedEx Office and Print Services, Inc.. (rxc)(jms).
February 26, 2024 Filing 1 NOTICE OF REMOVAL with Jury Demand ( Filing fee $ 405 receipt number ACASDC-18618940.), filed by FedEx Office and Print Services, Inc.. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet, #2 Exhibit A - Complaint, #3 Exhibit B - Summons, #4 Exhibit C - Answer to Complaint, #5 Proof of Service)The new case number is 3:24-cv-374-DMS-DDL. Judge Dana M. Sabraw and Magistrate Judge David D. Leshner are assigned to the case.(rxc) (jms).

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 Southern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: James v. FedEx Office and Print Services, 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: Jennifer James
Represented By: Cindy Jane Hickox
Represented By: David Michael Angeloff
Represented By: Guillermo F. Barrantes
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 Office and Print Services, Inc.
Represented By: James M Peterson
Represented By: Kyle William Nageotte
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: Does 1-10
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?