Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers and Trainmen v. National Railroad Passenger Corporation d/b/a Amtrak
Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers and Trainmen |
National Railroad Passenger Corporation d/b/a Amtrak |
1:2021cv06281 |
November 23, 2021 |
U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois |
Franklin U Valderrama |
Labor: Railway Labor Act |
45 U.S.C. § 151 |
None |
Docket Report
This docket was last retrieved on December 17, 2021. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
Document Text |
---|
Filing 19 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Franklin U. Valderrama: The Parties' joint motion to hold Plaintiffs' motion for preliminary injunction in abeyance #18 is granted in part. The Parties inform the Court that, as of 12/14/2021, Defendant National Railroad Passenger Corporation d/b/a Amtrak (Amtrak) has suspended its requirement that all employees be vaccinated against COVID-19. R. #18 1. As such, the Parties agree that the pending motion for preliminary injunction #12 in this case, as well as the pending motion for preliminary injunction in related case no. 21-cv-6282 R. 10, be held in abeyance unless or until Amtrak reinstates its mandatory vaccination policy. R. #18 2. Accordingly, the Court denies Plaintiffs' motion for preliminary injunction #12 without prejudice, with leave to refile if Amtrak reinstates its mandatory vaccination policy. Mailed notice (axc). |
Filing 18 MOTION by Defendant National Railroad Passenger Corporation d/b/a Amtrak for order Holding Plaintiffs' Motions for Preliminary Injunction in Abeyance (Joint) (Woo, Samantha) |
Filing 17 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Franklin U. Valderrama: The Court grants Defendant's Unopposed Motion for Leave to File a Response Brief in Excess of the Page Limitation. #16 Defendant National Railroad Passenger Corporation is granted leave to file their response to plaintiffs' motion for preliminary injunction that is 20 pages in length as a separate docket entry on CM/ECF. Mailed notice (axc). |
Filing 16 MOTION by Defendant National Railroad Passenger Corporation d/b/a Amtrak for leave to file excess pages (Unopposed) (Woo, Samantha) |
Filing 15 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Franklin U. Valderrama: The joint motion to reassign as related case no. 21-cv-6282 to this Court's docket #14 is granted. The Court sets the following schedule on Plaintiff's motion for preliminary injunction #12 : Defendant's response due by 12/29/2021; Plaintiff's reply due by 1/12/2022. Mailed notice (axc). |
Filing 14 MOTION by Defendant National Railroad Passenger Corporation d/b/a Amtrak to reassign case (Joint) (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A - Transcript of Proceedings)(Woo, Samantha) |
Filing 13 MEMORANDUM by Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers and Trainmen in support of motion for preliminary injunction #12 (Attachments: #1 Exhibit 1 (and attachments))(Pierce, Matthew) |
Filing 12 MOTION by Plaintiff Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers and Trainmen for preliminary injunction (Pierce, Matthew) |
Filing 11 NOTICE by National Railroad Passenger Corporation d/b/a Amtrak (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A - Joint Motion for Reassignment)(Woo, Samantha) |
Filing 10 WAIVER OF SERVICE returned executed by Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers and Trainmen. National Railroad Passenger Corporation d/b/a Amtrak waiver sent on 11/23/2021, answer due 1/24/2022. (Pierce, Matthew) |
Filing 9 ATTORNEY Appearance for Defendant National Railroad Passenger Corporation d/b/a Amtrak by James M Burnham (Burnham, James) |
Filing 8 ATTORNEY Appearance for Defendant National Railroad Passenger Corporation d/b/a Amtrak by Donald J. Munro (Munro, Donald) |
Filing 7 ATTORNEY Appearance for Defendant National Railroad Passenger Corporation d/b/a Amtrak by Samantha Woo (Woo, Samantha) |
Filing 6 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Franklin U. Valderrama: On or before 02/07/2022 the parties shall file a joint initial status report. A template for the Joint Initial Status Report, setting forth the information required, may be found at http://www.ilnd.uscourts.gov/Judges.aspx by clicking on Judge Valderrama's name and then again on the link entitled 'Joint Initial Status Report. Plaintiff must serve this Minute Entry on all other parties. If the defendant(s) has not been served with process by that date, plaintiff's counsel is instructed to file an individual status report indicating the status of service of process by the same deadline. The parties are further ordered to review all of Judge Valderrama's standing orders and the information available on his webpage. Any nongovernmental corporate party that qualifies under the Rules is reminded of the requirement to file a disclosure statement under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 7.1/N.D. Ill. Local Rule 3.2. Mailed notice (axc). |
Filing 5 ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers and Trainmen by Dimitre James Petroff (Petroff, Dimitre) |
Filing 4 ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers and Trainmen by Joshua D. McInerney (McInerney, Joshua) |
Filing 3 ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers and Trainmen by Ryan A Hagerty (Hagerty, Ryan) |
Filing 2 ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers and Trainmen by Matthew Pierce (Pierce, Matthew) |
Filing 1 COMPLAINT filed by Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers and Trainmen; Filing fee $ 402, receipt number 0752-18902193. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit, #2 Civil Cover Sheet)(Pierce, Matthew) |
CLERK'S NOTICE: Pursuant to Local Rule 73.1(b), a United States Magistrate Judge of this court is available to conduct all proceedings in this civil action. If all parties consent to have the currently assigned United States Magistrate Judge conduct all proceedings in this case, including trial, the entry of final judgment, and all post-trial proceedings, all parties must sign their names on the attached #Consent To# form. This consent form is eligible for filing only if executed by all parties. The parties can also express their consent to jurisdiction by a magistrate judge in any joint filing, including the Joint Initial Status Report or proposed Case Management Order. (ng, ) |
CASE ASSIGNED to the Honorable Franklin U. Valderrama. Designated as Magistrate Judge the Honorable Jeffrey T. Gilbert. Case assignment: Random assignment. (ng, ) |
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 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
Search for this case: Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers and Trainmen v. National Railroad Passenger Corporation d/b/a Amtrak | |
---|---|
Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
Plaintiff: Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers and Trainmen | |
Represented By: | Dimitre James Petroff |
Represented By: | Joshua D. McInerney |
Represented By: | Ryan A Hagerty |
Represented By: | Matthew Pierce |
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 | [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
Defendant: National Railroad Passenger Corporation d/b/a Amtrak | |
Represented By: | Donald J. Munro |
Represented By: | James M Burnham |
Represented By: | Samantha Woo |
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 | [ Unicourt | 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.