Moore v. Amtrak et al
| Vivian Moore |
| Chicago Union Station Company, Parkway Elevators, Inc., National Railroad Passenger Corporation Amtrak and Amtrak |
| 1:2019cv07255 |
| November 4, 2019 |
| US District Court for the Northern District of Illinois |
| Andrea R Wood |
| P.I.: Other |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1331 |
| Both |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on November 19, 2019. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 11 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Andrea R. Wood: Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1)(A)(i) #10 , this case is voluntarily dismissed without prejudice and with each party to bear its own attorneys' fees and costs. All pending hearing dates and motions are stricken. Civil case terminated. Mailed notice (ef, ) |
| Filing 10 STIPULATION of Dismissal (Laing, Susan) |
| Filing 9 NOTICE of Motion by Susan Kay Laing for presentment of motion for extension of time to file answer #8 before Honorable Andrea R. Wood on 11/20/2019 at 09:00 AM. (Laing, Susan) |
| Filing 8 MOTION by Defendant Amtrak for extension of time to file answer Motion For Extension of Time To File Responsive Pleading (Laing, Susan) |
| Filing 7 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Andrea R. Wood: Initial status hearing set for 12/4/2019 at 9:00 AM. The parties are directed to meet and conduct a planning conference pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(f). At least seven days before the initial status hearing, the parties shall file a joint written status report, not to exceed five pages in length. The initial status report shall provide the information described on the Court's website at www.ilnd.uscourts.gov under District Judges, Judge Andrea R. Wood, Initial Status Conference. Mailed notice (ef, ) |
| Filing 6 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. (lma, ) |
| Filing 5 MAILED Notice of Removal letter to counsel of record. (lma, ) |
| Filing 4 CERTIFICATE of Service Proof of Filing Copy of Filed Notice of Removal in Circuit Court by Susan Kay Laing on behalf of National Railroad Passenger Corporation Amtrak (Laing, Susan) |
| Filing 3 ATTORNEY Appearance for Defendant National Railroad Passenger Corporation Amtrak by Susan Kay Laing (Laing, Susan) |
| Filing 2 CIVIL Cover Sheet (Laing, Susan) |
| Filing 1 NOTICE of Removal from Circuit Court of Cook County, case number (2019 M1 302010) filed by National Railroad Passenger Corporation Amtrak Filing fee $ 400, receipt number 0752-16403447. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A)(Laing, Susan) |
| CASE ASSIGNED to the Honorable Andrea R. Wood. Designated as Magistrate Judge the Honorable Sidney I. Schenkier. Case assignment: Random assignment. (yt) |
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.
