Itano-Malstrom v. Town of Norwalk et al
| Kanako Itano-Malstrom |
| Norwalk Board Of Education and City of Norwalk |
| 3:2026cv00849 |
| May 31, 2026 |
| U.S. District Court for the District of Connecticut |
| Sarala V Nagala |
| Civil Rights: Jobs |
| 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on July 29, 2026. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 28
SCHEDULING ORDER: Initial disclosures due by September 11, 2026. Discovery due by March 1, 2027. Dispositive motions due by April 1, 2027. Initial Status Report due by December 1, 2026. Second Status Report due by March 8, 2027.All further deadlines are set forth in the attached scheduling order. Note that some of the dates in the scheduling order differ from those proposed by the parties' Rule 26(f) Report.The Clerk shall refer this case to a U.S. Magistrate Judge for purposes of a settlement conference. Signed by Judge Sarala V. Nagala on 7/29/2026.(IM)
|
| Filing 27 REPORT of Rule 26(f) Planning Meeting. (Pate, Riccardo) |
| Filing 26 Defendants' ANSWER to #22 Amended Complaint with Affirmative Defenses. by City of Norwalk, Norwalk Board Of Education.(Spahr, M.) |
|
Filing 25
ORDER granting #24 Motion for Extension of Time to Respond to the Court's Initial Discovery Protocols. Defendants shall provide their initial discovery to Plaintiff pursuant to the Court's Initial Discovery Protocols at ECF No. #12 by September 11, 2026. Plaintiff is afforded a commensurate extension. Signed by Judge Sarala V. Nagala on 7/22/2026. (GV)
|
| Filing 24 MOTION for Extension of Time until 09/11/2026to respond to Court's Initial Discovery Protocols (#12) #12 Notice re: Initial Discovery Protocols, #20 Answer to Complaint by City of Norwalk, Norwalk Board Of Education. (Spahr, M.) |
| Answer deadline updated for City of Norwalk to 7/27/2026; Norwalk Board Of Education to 7/27/2026. (sd) |
|
Filing 23
ORDER. Plaintiff has filed an amended complaint as of right pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a)(1). The Clerk is directed to change Defendant the Town of Norwalk to the "City of Norwalk" on the docket. Defendants shall answer or otherwise respond to Plaintiff's amended complaint by July 27, 2026. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a)(3). Signed by Judge Sarala V. Nagala on 7/14/2026. (GV)
|
| Filing 22 AMENDED COMPLAINT FIRST against All Defendants, filed by Kanako Itano-Malstrom.(Pate, Riccardo) |
|
Filing 21
ORDER granting #19 Motion for Extension of Time. The Court will treat Defendants' answer at ECF No. #20 as timely filed, but notes that competing case deadlines are the nature of practice, and the solution is to preemptively seek a motion for extension of time, pursuant to the Local Rules of this District. Additionally, the motion for an extension of time does not represent Plaintiff's position on the motion. Nonetheless, the Court grants it, so that this case may be decided on the merits, as is the Second Circuit's strong preference. Signed by Judge Sarala V. Nagala on 7/8/2026. (GV)
|
| Filing 20 Defendants' ANSWER to #2 Complaint with Affirmative Defenses by Norwalk Board Of Education, Town of Norwalk.(Spahr, M.) |
| Filing 19 MOTION for Extension of Time until 07/08/2026 to file Response to Complaint #2 Complaint by Norwalk Board Of Education, Town of Norwalk. (Spahr, M.) |
| Filing 18 NOTICE OF COMPLIANCE WITH PRETRIAL ORDER by Kanako Itano-Malstrom (Pate, Riccardo) |
| Set Deadlines: Rule 26 Meeting Report due by 8/14/2026. (sd) |
| Answer deadline updated for Norwalk Board Of Education to 7/10/2026; Town of Norwalk to 7/10/2026. (sd) |
|
Filing 17
ORDER. Plaintiff has submitted proof that Defendants were served with the complaint and summons on June 9, 2026, and accordingly their response to the complaint was due twenty-one days later, on June 30, 2026. ECF Nos. #14 , 15; Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(a)(1)(A)(i). To date, Defendants have not appeared or responded to the complaint. By July 10, 2026, Defendants shall file a response to the complaint and a motion for extension of time nunc pro tunc explaining why they failed to timely respond to the complaint. If Defendants fail to comply with this order, Plaintiff shall file a motion for default entry pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 55(a) by July 15, 2026.Plaintiff shall send a copy of this order to Defendants at their last known address by July 6, 2026, and file a notice of compliance with this order by July 7, 2026. Signed by Judge Sarala V. Nagala on 7/1/2026. (GV)
|
| Filing 16 NOTICE of Appearance by M. Jeffry Spahr on behalf of Norwalk Board Of Education, Town of Norwalk (Spahr, M.) |
| Filing 15 As Defendants were served on June 9, 2026, they shall answer or otherwise respond to the complaint by June 30, 2026. Signed by Judge Sarala V. Nagala on 6/22/2026. (GV) |
| Filing 14 First SUMMONS Returned Executed by Kanako Itano-Malstrom. All Defendants. (Pate, Riccardo) |
| Filing 13 NOTICE TO COUNSEL/SELF-REPRESENTED PARTIES : Counsel or self-represented parties initiating or removing this action are responsible for serving all parties with attached documents and copies of #5 Order on Pretrial Deadlines, 3 Notice re: Disclosure Statement, #12 Notice re: Initial Discovery Protocols, #8 Notice of Option to Consent to Magistrate Judge Jurisdiction, #6 Electronic Filing Order, #7 Standing Protective Order, #1 Notice of Appearance filed by Kanako Itano-Malstrom, 9 Notice re: AI-Assisted Research, #2 Complaint filed by Kanako Itano-Malstrom Signed by Clerk on 6/4/2026. (to) |
| Filing 11 ELECTRONIC SUMMONS ISSUED in accordance with Fed. R. Civ. P. 4 and LR 4 as to *Norwalk Board Of Education, Town of Norwalk* with answer to complaint due within *21* days. Attorney *Riccardo L. Pate* *155 Post Road East* *Suite 11* *Westport, CT 06880*. (dw) |
| Filing 10 ENTERED IN ERROR - NOTICE TO COUNSEL/SELF-REPRESENTED PARTIES : Counsel or self-represented parties initiating or removing this action are responsible for serving all parties with attached documents and copies of Signed by Clerk on 06/04/26.(dw) Modified on 6/4/2026 (to). |
| Docket Entry Correction re #5 Order on Pretrial Deadlines MODIFIED TO CORRECT THE DATE FILED AND CORRECT THE DEADLINE DATES (to) |
| Docket Entry Correction re #10 Electronic Service Documents MODIFIED TO NOTE ENTRY HAS BEEN ENTERED IN ERROR AND REDOCKETED AS DOC #13 (to) |
| Filing 4 First Disclosure Statement by Kanako Itano-Malstrom. (Pate, Riccardo) |
| Filing 12 Notice re: Initial Discovery Protocols. Signed by Clerk on 6/1/2026. (Attachments: #1 Discovery attachment 1, #2 Discovery attachment 2) (to) |
| Reset Deadlines: Amended Pleadings due by 7/31/2026 Discovery due by 12/1/2026 Dispositive Motions due by 1/5/2027 (to) |
| Filing 9 Notice to Counsel and Litigants Regarding AI-Assisted Research: Attorneys and pro se litigants alike should exercise great caution in submitting any AI-generated language in filings before the Court. Use of AI without verification of the accuracy of the information it generates like any other shoddy research method from other sources or tools implicates Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 11, the central purpose of which is to deter baseless filings in district court and thus to streamline the administration and procedure of the federal courts. Rule 11 applies fully to actions filed by pro se litigants.Therefore, all parties are on notice that the Court has a no-tolerance policy for any briefing (AI-assisted or not) that hallucinates legal propositions or otherwise severely misstates the law. Such filings will often result in sanctions absent reasonable excuse. See generally Willis v. U.S. Bank Nat'l Ass'n et al, No. 3:25-CV-516-BN, 2025 WL 1408897 (N.D. Tex. May 15, 2025). Signed by Clerk on 06/01/26.(dw) |
| Filing 8 Notice of Option to Consent to Magistrate Judge Jurisdiction to conduct all proceedings in this civil action (including presiding over a jury or non-jury trial) and to order the entry of final judgment.(dw) Modified on 6/3/2026 (dw). |
|
Filing 7
Standing Protective Order Signed by Judge Sarala V. Nagala on 06/1/26.(dw) Modified on 6/3/2026: Updated date filed (dw). Modified on 6/3/2026 (dw).
|
|
Filing 6
ELECTRONIC FILING ORDER FOR COUNSEL - PLEASE ENSURE COMPLIANCE WITH COURTESY COPY REQUIREMENTS IN THIS ORDER Signed by Judge Sarala V. Nagala on 06/1/26.(dw) Modified on 6/3/2026: Updated file date (dw). Modified on 6/3/2026 (dw).
|
|
Filing 5
Order on Pretrial Deadlines: Amended Pleadings due by 7/31/2026 Discovery due by 12/1/2026 Dispositive Motions due by 1/5/2027. Signed by Clerk (dw) (dw). Modified on 6/4/2026 TO CORRECT THE DATE FILED AND CORRECT THE DEADLINE DATES (to).
|
| Filing 2 COMPLAINT against Norwalk Board Of Education, Town of Norwalk, ( Filing fee $405 receipt number ACTDC-8626240) filed by Kanako Itano-Malstrom.(tm) Modified party name on 6/1/2026 (tm). |
| Filing 1 NOTICE of Appearance by Riccardo L. Pate on behalf of KANAKO ITANO-MALSTROM (Pate, Riccardo) |
| Request for Clerk to issue summons as to All Defendants. (Pate, Riccardo) |
| CASE ASSIGNMENT: District Judge Sarala V. Nagala assigned to the case. If the District Judge issues an Order of Referral to a Magistrate Judge for any matter other than settlement, the matter will be referred to Magistrate Judge S. Dave Vatti. (bf) |
| Filing 3 Notice: Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 7.1(b), a disclosure statement required under Rule 7.1(a) must be filed with a party's first appearance, pleading, petition, motion, response, or other request addressed to the Court and must be supplemented if any required information changes during the case. Signed by Clerk on 6/1/2026.(tm) |
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 Connecticut 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
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.
