Rodriguez v. Hibachi Express et al
| Saul Rodriguez |
| Jing S Xie and Hibachi Express |
| 6:2018cv01911 |
| November 7, 2018 |
| US District Court for the Middle District of Florida |
| Anne C Conway |
| Thomas B Smith |
| Labor: Fair Standards |
| 29 U.S.C. ยง 201 |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on October 14, 2020. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 6 NOTICE of pendency of related cases #4 per Local Rule 1.04(d) by Saul Rodriguez. Related case(s): No (Espino, Monica) Modified on 11/16/2018 (RMF). |
| Filing 5 CERTIFICATE of interested persons and corporate disclosure statement re #4 Related case/interested persons/ECF by Saul Rodriguez. (Espino, Monica) |
Filing 4
RELATED CASE ORDER,INTERESTED PERSONS ORDER and ORDER Requiring Electronic Filing.(FLSA). Notice of pendency of other actions due by 11/27/2018, Certificate of interested persons and corporate disclosure statement due by 11/27/2018. Signed by Judge Anne C. Conway on 11/13/2018. (RMF)
|
| Filing 3 SUMMONS issued as to Hibachi Express, Jing S Xie. (RMF) |
| Filing 2 NEW CASE ASSIGNED to Judge Anne C. Conway and Magistrate Judge Thomas B. Smith. New case number: 6:18-cv-1911-Orl-22TBS. (SJB) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT against All Defendants with Jury Demand (Filing fee $ 400 receipt number 113A-14798216) filed by Saul Rodriguez. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet, #2 Proposed Summons, #3 Proposed Summons)(Espino, Monica) |
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 Florida Middle 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.
