PIERRE v. UPSHIFT WORK, LLC
| RODRIGUE A. PIERRE |
| UPSHIFT WORK, LLC |
| 0:2023cv61266 |
| July 3, 2023 |
| U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida |
| Rodney Smith |
| Civil Rights: Jobs |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1441 Notice of Removal |
| Both |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on August 9, 2023. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 7
Order Granting #4 Defendant's Motion To Compel Arbitration. This action is STAYED pending the outcome of the parties arbitration. Defendants Motion to Dismiss is DENIED as MOOT. The Clerk is directed to administratively CLOSE this case. Signed by Judge Rodney Smith on 8/9/2023. See attached document for full details. (rbe)
|
| Filing 6 RESPONSE to #5 Order to Show Cause,, by RODRIGUE A. PIERRE. (ls) |
| Case Stayed Per DE #7 Closing Case. (rbe) |
|
Filing 5
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE re #4 Defendant's MOTION TO DISMISS #1 Notice of Removal (State Court Complaint), FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM AND COMPEL ARBITRATION WITH INCORPORATED MEMORANDUM OF LAW filed by UPSHIFT WORK, LLC. On or before August 11, 2023, Plaintiff shall either respond to Defendants Motion to Dismiss, or show cause why this action should not be dismissed for failure to prosecute. Signed by Judge Rodney Smith on 8/2/2023. See attached document for full details. (rbe)
|
| Filing 4 Defendant's MOTION TO DISMISS #1 Notice of Removal (State Court Complaint), FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM AND COMPEL ARBITRATION WITH INCORPORATED MEMORANDUM OF LAW by UPSHIFT WORK, LLC. Responses due by 7/24/2023 (Attachments: #1 Exhibit Plaintiff's Complaint, #2 Exhibit Mutual Arbitration Agreement)(Loe, W.) |
| Filing 3 Plaintiff Answer by RODRIGUE A. PIERRE. (pcs) |
| Filing 2 Clerks Notice of Judge Assignment to Judge Rodney Smith. Pursuant to 28 USC 636(c), the parties are hereby notified that the U.S. Magistrate Judge Lisette M. Reid is available to handle any or all proceedings in this case. If agreed, parties should complete and file the Consent form found on our website. It is not necessary to file a document indicating lack of consent. (rbe) |
| Filing 1 NOTICE OF REMOVAL (STATE COURT COMPLAINT - RODRIGUE A. PIERRE v. UPSHIFT WORK, LLC) Filing fee $ 402.00 receipt number AFLSDC-16737030, filed by UPSHIFT WORK, LLC. No Answer/ Motion to Dismiss Filed. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit Plaintiff's State Court Complaint, #2 Exhibit All process, pleadings, and orders served upon Defendant, #3 Exhibit completed JS 44 Civil Cover Sheet)(Loe, W.) Modified text & attachment description on 7/5/2023 (rbe). |
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 Florida Southern 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: PIERRE v. UPSHIFT WORK, LLC | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Plaintiff: RODRIGUE A. PIERRE | |
| 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: UPSHIFT WORK, LLC | |
| Represented By: | W. Taylor Loe |
| Represented By: | Craig Christopher Minko |
| 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.
