Tolbert v. AT&T Services, Inc.
| Bridgette Tolbert |
| AT&T Services, Inc. |
| 1:2026cv00554 |
| February 11, 2026 |
| U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado |
| Philip A Brimmer |
| Scott T Varholak |
| Civil Rights: Jobs |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 2000 Job Discrimination (Sex) |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on March 26, 2026. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 16 Defendant's ANSWER to #1 Complaint, and Jury Demand by AT&T Services, Inc..(Campbell, Stacey) |
| Filing 15 NOTICE of Entry of Appearance by Samera Syeda Ludwig on behalf of AT&T Services, Inc.Attorney Samera Syeda Ludwig added to party AT&T Services, Inc.(pty:dft) (Ludwig, Samera) |
| Filing 14 NOTICE of Entry of Appearance Andrew T. Williamson by Andrew T. Williamson on behalf of AT&T Services, Inc.Attorney Andrew T. Williamson added to party AT&T Services, Inc.(pty:dft) (Williamson, Andrew) |
| Filing 13 STIPULATION for Extension of Time to Answer or Respond to the Complaint by Defendant AT&T Services, Inc.. AT&T Services, Inc. answer due 3/26/2026. (Campbell, Stacey) |
| Filing 12 CORPORATE DISCLOSURE STATEMENT. (Campbell, Stacey) |
| Filing 11 NOTICE of Entry of Appearance of Brett A. Whitley by Brett Austin Whitley on behalf of AT&T Services, Inc.Attorney Brett Austin Whitley added to party AT&T Services, Inc.(pty:dft) (Whitley, Brett) |
| Filing 10 NOTICE of Entry of Appearance of Stacey A. Campbell by Stacey A. Campbell on behalf of AT&T Services, Inc.Attorney Stacey A. Campbell added to party AT&T Services, Inc.(pty:dft) (Campbell, Stacey) |
| Filing 9 NOTICE of Entry of Appearance by Bryan Ross Kaufman on behalf of Bridgette TolbertAttorney Bryan Ross Kaufman added to party Bridgette Tolbert(pty:pla) (Kaufman, Bryan) |
Filing 8
ORDER SETTING DEADLINE FOR FILING ELECTION CONCERNING CONSENT/NON-CONSENT TO MAGISTRATE JURISDICTION FORM AND SETTING SCHEDULING CONFERENCE by Magistrate Judge Scott T. Varholak on 2/17/2026. Consent Form due by 4/7/2026. Proposed Scheduling Order due 4/14/2026. Scheduling Conference set for 4/21/2026 11:00 AM in Courtroom A 402 before Magistrate Judge Scott T. Varholak. (ccuen, )
|
| Filing 7 SUMMONS Returned Executed by Bridgette Tolbert. AT&T Services, Inc. served on 2/12/2026, answer due 3/5/2026. (Sanchez, Joseph) |
|
Filing 6
ORDER REFERRING CASE to Magistrate Judge Scott T. Varholak for non-dispositive matters. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 636(b)(1)(A) and (B) and Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(a) and (b), this case is referred to the assigned United States Magistrate Judge to (1) convene a scheduling conference under Fed. R. Civ. P. 16(b) and enter a scheduling order meeting the requirements of D.C.COLO.LCivR 16.2, (2) conduct such status conferences and issue such orders necessary for compliance with the scheduling order, including amendments or modifications of the scheduling order upon a showing of good cause, (3) hear and determine pretrial matters, including discovery and other non-dispositive motions, and (4) conduct a pretrial conference and enter a pretrial order. Court sponsored alternative dispute resolution is governed by D.C.COLO.LCivR 16.6. On the recommendation or informal request of the magistrate judge or on the request of the parties by motion, this court may direct the parties to engage in an early neutral evaluation, a settlement conference, or another alternative dispute resolution proceeding, by Chief Judge Philip A. Brimmer on 2/12/2026. Text Only Entry (pabsec, )
|
| Filing 5 CASE REASSIGNED. Pursuant to #4 Consent to Jurisdiction of Magistrate Judge, All parties do not consent. Case randomly reassigned to Chief Judge Philip A. Brimmer and drawn to Magistrate Judge Scott T. Varholak. All future pleadings should be designated as 26-cv-00554-PAB. (Text Only Entry) (sphil, ) |
| Filing 4 CONSENT to Jurisdiction of Magistrate Judge by Plaintiff Bridgette Tolbert All parties do not consent.. (Sanchez, Joseph) |
| Filing 3 SUMMONS issued by Clerk. (Attachments: #1 Magistrate Judge Consent Form) (echa, ) |
| Filing 2 Case assigned to Magistrate Judge Scott T. Varholak. Text Only Entry. (echa, ) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT against AT&T Services, Inc. (Filing fee $ 405,Receipt Number ACODC-10817596)Attorney Joseph Patrick Sanchez added to party Bridgette Tolbert(pty:pla), filed by Bridgette Tolbert. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet, #2 Summons)(Sanchez, Joseph) |
Access additional case information on PACER
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the U.S. Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the Colorado 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: Tolbert v. AT&T Services, Inc. | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Plaintiff: Bridgette Tolbert | |
| Represented By: | Bryan Ross Kaufman |
| Represented By: | Joseph Patrick Sanchez |
| 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 | [ Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Defendant: AT&T Services, Inc. | |
| Represented By: | Samera Syeda Ludwig |
| Represented By: | Andrew T. Williamson |
| Represented By: | Stacey A. Campbell |
| Represented By: | Brett Austin Whitley |
| 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 | [ 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.
