BLACK v. GUZMAN
| JENNIFER CLARICE BLACK and JENNIFER CLARICE BLEDSOE BLACK |
| ISABELLA CASILLAS GUZMAN |
| 1:2022cv01873 |
| June 29, 2022 |
| US District Court for the District of Columbia |
| Beryl A Howell |
| Civil Rights: Jobs |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 2000 e Job Discrimination (Employment) |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on April 24, 2023. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 4
AMENDED COMPLAINT JENNIFER CLARICE BLEDSOE BLACK against ISABELLA CASILLAS GUZMAN with Jury Demand filed by JENNIFER CLARICE BLEDSOE BLACK. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit Redline First Amended Complaint)(Bennett, Paul)
|
|
Filing 3
STANDING ORDER. Signed by Chief Judge Beryl A. Howell on June 30, 2022. (lcbah4)
|
|
Filing 2
SUMMONS (3) Issued Electronically as to ISABELLA CASILLAS GUZMAN, U.S. Attorney and U.S. Attorney General (Attachment: #1 Notice and Consent)(znmg)
|
|
Case Assigned to Chief Judge Beryl A. Howell. (znmg)
|
|
Filing 1
COMPLAINT against ISABELLA CASILLAS GUZMAN with Jury Demand ( Filing fee $ 402 receipt number ADCDC-9340193) filed by JENNIFER CLARICE BLACK. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet Civil Cover Sheet, #2 Summons Summons for US Small Business Administration, #3 Summons Summons service on Attorney General, #4 Summons Summons service on Civil Process Clerk)(Bennett, Paul) (Attachment 1 replaced on 6/30/2022) (znmg).
|
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.
