Gutierrez v. IBM Corporation
| Stephen P. Gutierrez |
| IBM Corporation |
| 1:2026cv00922 |
| March 6, 2026 |
| U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado |
| Timothy P O'Hara |
| Regina M Rodriguez |
| Civil Rights: Jobs |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 2000 (e)(2)-(o)(t) - Job Discrimination (Other) |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on April 3, 2026. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 7
MINUTE ORDER. Pursuant to the Order of Reference, this Court will hold the Fed. R. Civ. P. 16(b) Scheduling Conference on July 8, 2026 at 11:00 a.m. in Courtroom C-402, on the fourth floor of the Byron G. Rogers United States Courthouse located at 1929 Stout Street, Denver, Colorado, 80294. Plaintiff shall complete service of process on Defendant as soon as possible pursuant to the instructions that the Clerk of Court provided in the letter at ECF #6 and in a way that complies with Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(h) or obtain a waiver of service. Although this Court generally prefers in-person attendance, this Court gives pro se litigants and counsel who are outside the Denver metropolitan area the option to appear remotely. To connect to the courtroom remotely via video teleconference, use the attached Cisco Meeting App Instructions. No later than seven days before the Scheduling Conference, the Parties shall (1) file their Proposed Scheduling Order onto the case docket sheet and (2) submit the proposed Scheduling Order in Word format by joint email, copying all Parties, to Chambers at #o'[email protected]. By Magistrate Judge Timothy P. O'Hara on 4/3/2026. For all non-e-filer pro se parties, a copy of this document has been sent via U.S. Mail to the mailing address of record. (ggill, )
|
| Filing 6 LETTER from Clerk of Court re: Service of Process #1 Complaint,. (Attachments: #1 Summons, #2 F.R.Civ. P Rule 4, #3 Copy of Consent Form issued at ECF #4 )(ccuen, ) |
|
Filing 5
ORDER REFERRING CASE to Magistrate Judge Timothy P. O'Hara. 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 Local Civ. R. 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, (4) conduct hearings, including evidentiary hearings, and submit proposed findings of fact and recommendations for rulings on dispositive motions, and (5) pursuant to Local Civ. R. 16.6 and at the discretion of the Magistrate Judge, convene such early neutral evaluation and/or settlement conferences and direct related procedures as may facilitate resolution of this case without the necessity of a motion or prior authorization of the undersigned. SO ORDERED by Judge Regina M. Rodriguez on 3/10/2026. For all non-e-filer pro se parties, a copy of this document has been sent via U.S. Mail to the mailing address of record. Text Only Entry (rmrja)
|
| Filing 4 Magistrate Judge consent form issued pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 636(c). (ggill, ) |
|
Filing 3
ORDER DRAWING CASE. After review pursuant to D.C.COLO.LCivR 8.1(a), the Court has determined that this case does not appear appropriate for summary dismissal. Therefore, the case will be drawn to a presiding judge and, if applicable, to a magistrate judge. See D.C.COLO.LCivR 8.1(c). Accordingly, it is ordered that this case be drawn to a presiding judge and, if applicable, to a magistrate judge. (Case randomly reassigned to Judge Regina M. Rodriguez and drawn to Magistrate Judge Timothy P. O'Hara for all further proceedings. All future pleadings shall be designated to 26-cv-00922-RMR). By Magistrate Judge Richard T. Gurley on 3/10/2026. For all non-e-filer pro se parties, a copy of this document has been sent via U.S. Mail to the mailing address of record. (ggill, )
|
| Filing 2 Case assigned to Magistrate Judge Richard T. Gurley for Initial Review pursuant to D.C.COLO.LCivR 8.1 (a). Text Only Entry. (eguth, ) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT for Employment Discrimination against IBM Corporation Filing Fee: $405.00Receipt Number:117256, filed by Stephen P. Gutierrez. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet, #2 Exhibit, #3 Exhibit, #4 Exhibit, #5 Exhibit, #6 Exhibit, #7 Exhibit, #8 Exhibit, #9 Exhibit, #10 Exhibit, #11 Exhibit, #12 Exhibit, #13 Exhibit, #14 Exhibit, #15 Exhibit, #16 Exhibit, #17 Exhibit, #18 Exhibit)(eguth, ) |
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: Gutierrez v. IBM Corporation | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Plaintiff: Stephen P. Gutierrez | |
| 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: IBM Corporation | |
| 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.
