Ahluwalia et al v. United States of America
| Yoglackshan Ahluwalia and Saroj Ahluwalia |
| United States of America |
| 1:2019cv00229 |
| January 11, 2019 |
| US District Court for the Northern District of Illinois |
| Edmond E Chang |
| Tax Suit: Taxes |
| 26 U.S.C. ยง 7422 |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on February 20, 2019. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 12 COMPLAINT filed by Yoglackshan Ahluwalia; Jury Demand. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit Partially Redacted Exhibit A, #2 Exhibit Partially Redacted Exhibit B)(Strouse, Jonathan) |
| Filing 11 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Edmond E. Chang: Plaintiffs' motion #9 to seal Exhibits A and B to the complaint is granted this way: the Clerk's Office shall place R. 1 in its entirety under seal. By 02/22/2019, Plaintiffs shall file a public version of the complaint and its redacted exhibits. (The reason for this approach is that the CM/ECF system does not have the function to seal only exhibits to an entry.)Emailed notice (slb, ) |
| Filing 10 NOTICE of Motion by Jonathan Edward Strouse for presentment of motion for leave to file #9 before Honorable Edmond E. Chang on 2/19/2019 at 08:30 AM. (Strouse, Jonathan) |
| Filing 9 MOTION by Plaintiff Yoglackshan Ahluwalia for leave to file Exhibit A and B to Complaint Under Seal (Strouse, Jonathan) |
Filing 8
GENERAL ORDER 19-0004: RESETTING OF DEADLINES IN CIVIL MATTERS INVOLVING THE UNITED STATES AS A PARTY. IT APPEARING THAT as a result of the partial federal government shutdown, this Court amended General Order 18-0028 suspending as of December 21, 2018, all civil litigation in which the United States of America, its agencies, its officers, or employees were parties, with the stated intention of clarifying schedules in such cases upon the expiration of the lapse in appropriations; and IT FURTHER APPEARING THAT appropriations having been restored to fund the Department of Justice and other Executive Branch agencies, with employees beginning to report for work beginning on January 28, 2019; accordingly IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the stay entered by General Order 18-0028 is hereby lifted, and any and all deadlines in the affected civil litigation (whether established by order, rule, or agreement.), including but not limited to any scheduled discovery and pleading dates, are extended by 42 days. (For Further Details See Attached Order). Signed by the Honorable Ruben Castillo on 1/28/2019: Mailed notice. (mgw, )
|
| Filing 7 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Edmond E. Chang: Initial status hearing for 04/17/2019 at 9:30 a.m. The parties must file a joint initial status report with the content described in the attached status report requirements at least 3 business days before the initial status hearing. Plaintiff must still file the report even if not all Defendants have been served or have responded to requests to craft a joint report. Because the Procedures are occasionally revised, counsel must read them anew even if counsel has appeared before Judge Chang in other cases.Emailed notice (Attachments: #1 Status Report Requirements) (slb, ) |
| SUMMONS Issued as to United States of America, U.S. Attorney, and U.S. Attorney General (rc, ) |
| Filing 6 AMENDED GENERAL ORDER 18-0028 dated 01/08/2019: On December 26, 2018, General Order 18-0028 was entered. It appearing that the lapse of congressional appropriations funding the federal government continues, therefore General Order 18-0028 is now amended. (For Further Details See Attached Order). Signed by the Honorable Ruben Castillo on 1/8/2019: Mailed notice. (jjr, ) |
|
Filing 5
GENERAL ORDER 18-0028 dated 12/26/18: IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, effective December 26, 2018, that all civil litigation involving as a party the United States of America, is immediately suspended, postponed and held in abeyance continuing for a period of fourteen (14) days from the date of entry of this General Order (For Further Details See Attached Order). Signed by the Honorable Ruben Castillo on 12/26/2018: Mailed notice. (jjr, )
|
| Filing 4 NOTICE TO THE PARTIES - The Court is participating in the Mandatory Initial Discovery Pilot (MIDP). The key features and deadlines are set forth in this Notice which includes a link to the (MIDP) Standing Order and a Checklist for use by the parties. In cases subject to the pilot, all parties must respond to the mandatory initial discovery requests set forth in the Standing Order before initiating any further discovery in this case. Please note: The discovery obligations in the Standing Order supersede the disclosures required by Rule 26(a)(1). Any party seeking affirmative relief must serve a copy of the following documents (Notice of Mandatory Initial Discovery and the Standing Order) on each new party when the Complaint, Counterclaim, Crossclaim, or Third-Party Complaint is served. (tt, ) |
| Filing 3 ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiffs Saroj Ahluwalia, Yoglackshan Ahluwalia by Jonathan Edward Strouse (Strouse, Jonathan) |
| Filing 2 CIVIL Cover Sheet (Strouse, Jonathan) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT For Tax Refund filed by Yoglackshan Saroj; Jury Demand. Filing fee $ 400, receipt number 0752-15364054. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A, #2 Exhibit B)(Strouse, Jonathan) |
| CASE ASSIGNED to the Honorable Edmond E. Chang. Designated as Magistrate Judge the Honorable Jeffrey T. Gilbert. Case assignment: Random assignment. (kb, ) |
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 Illinois Northern 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.
