Molina v. Home Depot
| Eduardo Edgar Molina |
| Home Depot USA, Incorporated |
| 21-20128 |
| March 8, 2021 |
| U.S. Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit |
| Other |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on April 19, 2021. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| EXTENSION RECEIVED for Appellant Mr. Eduardo Edgar Molina. Extension Granted to and including 05/27/2021. A/Pet's Brief deadline updated to 05/27/2021 for Appellant Eduardo Edgar Molina [21-20128] (ABT) [Entered: 04/19/2021 05:16 PM] |
| UNOPPOSED LEVEL 1 EXTENSION REQUESTED by Appellant Mr. Eduardo Edgar Molina for filing Appellant's Brief on the Merits until 05/27/2021 [21-20128] (Scott Parker Armstrong ) [Entered: 04/19/2021 03:45 PM] |
| APPEARANCE FORM FILED by Attorney(s) Katie Banks for party(s) Appellee Home Depot USA, Incorporated, in case 21-20128 [21-20128] (CCR) [Entered: 03/23/2021 03:43 PM] |
| APPEARANCE FORM FILED by Attorney Scott Parker Armstrong for Appellant Eduardo Edgar Molina in 21-20128 [21-20128] (RLL) [Entered: 03/19/2021 11:43 AM] |
| APPEARANCE FORM for the court's review. Lead Counsel? No. [21-20128] (Katie Banks ) [Entered: 03/19/2021 03:45 PM] |
| BRIEFING NOTICE ISSUED A/Pet's Brief Due on 04/27/2021 for Appellant Eduardo Edgar Molina. [21-20128] (CBW) [Entered: 03/18/2021 04:09 PM] |
| ELECTRONIC RECORD ON APPEAL FILED. Admitted Exhibits on File in District Court? Yes. Video/Audio Exhibits on File in District Court? No Electronic ROA deadline satisfied. [21-20128] (CBW) [Entered: 03/18/2021 04:08 PM] |
| TRANSCRIPT ORDER received advising transcript unnecessary for appeal purposes. [21-20128] REVIEWED AND/OR EDITED - The original text prior to review appeared as follows: TRANSCRIPT ORDER received from Appellant Mr. Eduardo Edgar Molina advising transcript unnecessary for appeal purposes. Date of Service: 03/18/2021 via email - Attorney for Appellant: Armstrong; Attorney for Appellee: Bernhardt [21-20128] (Scott Parker Armstrong ) [Entered: 03/18/2021 03:10 PM] |
| APPEARANCE FORM received from Mr. Scott Parker Armstrong for Mr. Eduardo Edgar Molina for the court's review. Lead Counsel? Yes. [21-20128] (Scott Parker Armstrong ) [Entered: 03/18/2021 03:08 PM] |
| INITIAL CASE CHECK by Attorney Advisor complete, Action: Case OK to Process. [9524310-2] Initial AA Check Due satisfied. [21-20128] (RLL) [Entered: 03/12/2021 10:23 AM] |
| ELECTRONIC RECORD ON APPEAL REQUESTED from District Court for 4:19-CV-1896. Electronic ROA due on 03/29/2021. [21-20128] (RLL) [Entered: 03/12/2021 10:29 AM] |
| PRIVATE CIVIL DIVERSITY CASE docketed. NOA filed by Appellant Mr. Eduardo Edgar Molina [21-20128] (CAG) [Entered: 03/08/2021 11:47 AM] |
Access additional case information on PACER
Access the Case Summary and Docket Report to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
| Search for this case: Molina v. Home Depot | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Plaintiff / appellant: Eduardo Edgar Molina | |
| Represented By: | Scott Parker Armstrong |
| 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 / appellee: Home Depot USA, Incorporated | |
| Represented By: | Jason Ryan Bernhardt |
| Represented By: | Katie Banks |
| 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.
