Anjum et al v. CITY OF CHICAGO
| Imad Salamah and Mohammad Anjum |
| CITY OF CHICAGO |
| 1:2021cv00205 |
| January 13, 2021 |
| US District Court for the Northern District of Illinois |
| Edmond E Chang |
| Real Property: Other |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1331 |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on March 24, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 16
MINUTE entry before the Honorable Edmond E. Chang: The City's motion #12 to use extra pages and to set briefing schedule is granted. The City shall file the brief in support of the dismissal motion #13 on the docket as a separate docket entry. The Plaintiffs shall respond by 04/02/2021. The City shall reply by 04/23/2021. On the motion #14 to stay discovery, the Plaintiffs shall respond by 03/15/2021, limiting the response to no more than five pages. Any reply is due by 03/22/2021, also with a five-page cap. The tracking status hearing of 03/12/2021 is reset to 03/26/2021 at 8:30 a.m., but to track the case only (no appearance is required, the case will not be called). In the meantime, discovery is stayed during the briefing of the stay motion. Mailed notice (cn).
|
|
Filing 15
STATUS Report by Mohammad Anjum (Brennan, Bevin)
|
|
Filing 14
MOTION by Defendant CITY OF CHICAGO to stay discovery pending ruling on motion to dismiss (Rosen, Jordan)
|
|
Filing 13
MOTION by Defendant CITY OF CHICAGO to dismiss Plaintiffs' Amended Complaint (Rosen, Jordan)
|
|
Filing 12
MOTION by Defendant CITY OF CHICAGO for leave to file excess pages and to set briefing schedule (Rosen, Jordan)
|
|
Filing 11
ATTORNEY Appearance for Defendant CITY OF CHICAGO by Thomas P. McNulty (McNulty, Thomas)
|
|
Filing 10
ATTORNEY Appearance for Defendant CITY OF CHICAGO by Peter Hardt Cavanaugh (Cavanaugh, Peter)
|
|
Filing 9
MINUTE entry before the Honorable Edmond E. Chang: In light of the filing of the First Amended Complaint and the answer or response deadline of 03/04/2021, the tracking status hearing of 02/12/2021 is reset to 03/12/2021 at 8:30 a.m., but to track the case only (no appearance is required, the case will not be called). Instead, the parties shall file a joint discovery status report by 03/05/2021. Emailed notice (mw, )
|
|
Filing 8
First AMENDED complaint by Imad Salamah, Mohammad Anjum against CITY OF CHICAGO (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A, #2 Exhibit B, #3 Exhibit C)(Brennan, Bevin)
|
|
Filing 6
MINUTE entry before the Honorable Edmond E. Chang: The City's unopposed extension motion to answer or to respond #5 is granted to 02/17/2021. But the Plaintiffs shall have until 02/04/2021 to file an amended complaint. If an amended complaint is filed, then the response deadline is reset to 03/04/2021. To track the case only (no appearance is required, the case will not be called), a status hearing is set for 02/12/2021 at 8:30 a.m. Emailed notice (mw, )
|
|
Filing 5
MOTION by Defendant CITY OF CHICAGO for extension of time (Rosen, Jordan)
|
|
Filing 4
ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiffs Mohammad Anjum, Imad Salamah by Bevin Megan Brennan (Brennan, Bevin)
|
|
Filing 3
ATTORNEY Appearance for Defendant CITY OF CHICAGO by Jordan Alexander Rosen (Rosen, Jordan)
|
|
Filing 2
CIVIL Cover Sheet (Rosen, Jordan)
|
|
Filing 1
NOTICE of Removal filed by CITY OF CHICAGO (Rosen, Jordan)
|
|
CASE ASSIGNED to the Honorable Edmond E. Chang. Designated as Magistrate Judge the Honorable Gabriel A. Fuentes. FEE DUE, NO INFORMA PAUPERIS APPLICATION SUBMITTED. Case assignment: Random assignment. (kl, )
|
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.
