SMITH v. NATIONAL RAILROAD PASSENGER CORP.
| Todd Smith |
| NATIONAL RAILROAD PASSENGER CORP. and NATIONAL RAILROAD PASSENGER CORP. doing business as AMTRAK |
| 1:2022cv00322 |
| February 7, 2022 |
| US District Court for the District of Columbia |
| Tanya S Chutkan |
| Civil Rights: Jobs |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1331 Fed. Question: Employment Discrimination |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on March 31, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 8 MEET AND CONFER STATEMENT. (Attachments: #1 Text of Proposed Order)(Davis, Alison) |
| Set/Reset Deadlines: Joint Meet & Confer Report due by 3/31/2022. (tb) |
| Filing 7 ANSWER to Complaint by NATIONAL RAILROAD PASSENGER CORP..(Davis, Alison) |
| Filing 6 LCvR 26.1 CERTIFICATE OF DISCLOSURE of Corporate Affiliations and Financial Interests by NATIONAL RAILROAD PASSENGER CORP. (Davis, Alison) |
MINUTE ORDER: No later than 3/31/22 the parties shall meet, confer and file their joint Report of the Parties' Planning Meeting, pursuant to Rule 26(f) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and Local Civil Rule 16.3. The Report shall include a proposed Scheduling Order in the format found on Judge Chutkan's court webpage, along with any proposed changes which shall be highlighted. On the same day that the parties file their Rule 26 report and proposed Scheduling Order, the parties shall also email a Word version of the proposed order to Chambers. When proposing deadlines, the parties shall avoid proposing a schedule that contains submission of simultaneous dispositive cross-motions. In addition to the requirements under the Federal and Local Rules, the parties' report shall contain a succinct summary of the case and the statutory basis for all causes of action and defenses. Separate Reports will be stricken, sua sponte.. Signed by Judge Tanya S. Chutkan on 3/17/22. (DJS)
|
| Set/Reset Deadlines: Answer due by 3/17/2022. (tb) |
|
MINUTE ORDER granting #4 Motion for Extension of Time to Answer. Defendant's Answer is now due on March 17, 2022. Signed by Judge Tanya S. Chutkan on 3/4/2022. (lcac)
|
| Filing 5 NOTICE of Appearance by Anna M. Sheridan on behalf of NATIONAL RAILROAD PASSENGER CORP. (Sheridan, Anna) |
| Filing 4 Consent MOTION for Extension of Time to File Answer re #1 Complaint by NATIONAL RAILROAD PASSENGER CORP.. (Attachments: #1 Text of Proposed Order Order)(Davis, Alison) |
| Filing 3 SUMMONS (1) Issued Electronically as to NATIONAL RAILROAD PASSENGER CORP.. (Attachment: #1 Notice and Consent)(znmg) |
| Case Assigned to Judge Tanya S. Chutkan. (znmg) |
| Filing 2 ERRATA by TODD SMITH re #1 Complaint filed by TODD SMITH. (Thompson, Nicholas) |
| NOTICE OF ERROR re #1 Complaint; emailed to nthompson@caseyjones.law, cc'd 0 associated attorneys -- The PDF file you docketed contained errors: 1. Noncompliance with LCvR 5.1(c). Please file an errata correcting the initiating pleading to include the name & full residence address of each party using the event Errata., 2. For future reference: The civil cover sheet should be filed in a non-fillable PDF format. No action is required at this time., 3. COMPLIANCE DEADLINE is by close of business today. This case will not proceed any further until all errors are satisfied. (znmg, ) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT against All Defendants with Jury Demand ( Filing fee $ 402 receipt number ADCDC-9029326) filed by Todd Smith. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet, #2 Summons)(Thompson, Nicholas) |
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 District Of Columbia 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.
