King v. Ford Motor Co et al
| LaWanda King |
| Ford Motor Co and International Union United Automobile Aerospace &Agricultural Implement Workers of America (UAW) AFL-C10 |
| 1:2022cv00259 |
| January 14, 2022 |
| US District Court for the Northern District of Illinois |
| Martha M Pacold |
| Civil Rights: Jobs |
| 42 U.S.C. § 2000 e Job Discrimination (Employment) |
| Both |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on December 29, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 46 ANNUAL REMINDER: Pursuant to #Local Rule 3.2 (Notification of Affiliates)#, any nongovernmental party, other than an individual or sole proprietorship, must file a statement identifying all its affiliates known to the party after diligent review or, if the party has identified no affiliates, then a statement reflecting that fact must be filed. An affiliate is defined as follows: any entity or individual owning, directly or indirectly (through ownership of one or more other entities), 5% or more of a party. The statement is to be electronically filed as a PDF in conjunction with entering the affiliates in CM/ECF as prompted. As a reminder to counsel, parties must supplement their statements of affiliates within thirty (30) days of any change in the information previously reported. This minute order is being issued to all counsel of record to remind counsel of their obligation to provide updated information as to additional affiliates if such updating is necessary. If counsel has any questions regarding this process, this #LINK# will provide additional information. Signed by the Executive Committee on 12/29/2022: Mailed notice. (tg, ) |
| Filing 45 NOTICE by Joshua M File of Change of Address (File, Joshua) |
| Filing 44 REPLY by Ford Motor Co to response in opposition to motion #40 (Millman, Timothy) |
| Filing 43 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Martha M. Pacold: Plaintiff's "motion for judicial notice of adjudicative facts requesting review of specific evidence from her previous case no. 1:13-cv-07967 and consideration of relevant new evidence and material facts as it relates to defendant Ford's motions to dismiss (12(b)(6) and (9)(b)) before ruling" #39 is denied. The motion asks that this court review evidence and facts that plaintiff contends were not available to her during her previous litigation against Ford in case no. 13-cv-7967 and contends that the previous district court judge erred in granting summary judgment in 13-cv-7967. The motion is denied for the following reasons. First, this case is at the motion to dismiss stage, and although a plaintiff may add facts that are consistent with allegations in the complaint in a response to a motion to dismiss, a plaintiff may not supplement or amend a complaint by presenting new facts or legal theories in opposition to a motion to dismiss. Duffy v. Ticketreserve, Inc., 722 F. Supp. 2d 977, 990 (N.D. Ill. 2010). Further, the court may take judicial notice of matters of public record. However, plaintiff's current request, which raises numerous complex fact issues and cites voluminous records from the prior case, goes well beyond what is appropriate at the motion to dismiss stage. Second, to the extent the motion asks that this court review the summary judgment ruling in 13-cv-7967, this court has no power to do so. (rao, ) |
| Filing 42 REPLY by International Union United Automobile Aerospace &Agricultural Implement Workers of America (UAW) AFL-C10 to response in opposition to motion #41 , MOTION TO DISMISS FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM by Defendant International Union United Automobile Aerospace &Agricultural Implement Workers of America (UAW) AFL-C10 #32 (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A)(File, Joshua) |
| Filing 41 RESPONSE by LaWanda King, in Opposition to UAW 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss. (Exhibits) (rc, ) |
| Filing 40 RESPONSE by LaWanda King, in Opposition to Defendant Ford's 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss. (Exhibits) (rc, ) |
| Filing 39 MOTION by Plaintiff LaWanda King for judicial notice of adjudicative facts requesting review of specific evidence from her previous case no. 1:13-cv-07967 and consideration of relevant new evidence and material facts as it relates to defendant Ford's motions to dimiss (12(b)(6) and 9(b)) before ruling. (Exhibits) (rc, ) |
| Filing 38 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Martha M. Pacold: Plaintiff's motion for extension of time to respond to Defendants' motions to dismiss #37 is granted. Plaintiff's response to Defendants' motions to dismiss #22 , #32 is due by 8/10/2022. Defendants' reply briefs are due by 8/24/2022. (rao, ) |
| Filing 37 MOTION by Plaintiff LaWanda King for additional extension of time to respond to defendant's Ford Motor Co. et al. pleading motions to dismiss. (rc, ) |
| Filing 36 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Martha M. Pacold: Plaintiff's motion for extension of time to file a response to defendants' motions to dismiss #34 is granted. Plaintiff's responses to both motions are due 7/8/2022; defendants' reply briefs are due 7/22/2022. Plaintiff has also filed a motion for leave to file excess pages in response to the motions to dismiss. #35 . This motion #35 is denied without prejudice to renewal. Plaintiff states that her responses may require more than 15 pages, but she does not specify how many more pages she requires in responding to the motions to dismiss. Moreover, the court has reviewed the motions, and it does not appear that the motions are so long or complex that plaintiff would require more than 15 pages to respond to the motions to dismiss. However, if in the process of drafting her responses, plaintiff feels that she cannot adequately respond to the motions with 15 pages per response, she may renew her request and specify how many more pages she requests for the responses. (rao, ) |
| Filing 35 MOTION by Plaintiff LaWanda King requesting leave to prepare and file pages greater than 15 to respond to both motions to dismiss. (ph, ) |
| Filing 34 MOTION by Plaintiff LaWanda King for extensions of time to respond to Defendants separate motions to dismiss. (ph, ) |
| Filing 33 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Martha M. Pacold: Plaintiff's response to Defendant, International Union, United Automobile, Aerospace & Agricultural Implement Workers of America, UAW's motion to dismiss #32 is due by 6/23/2022. Defendant's reply is due by 7/14/2022. (rao, ) |
| Filing 32 MOTION TO DISMISS FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM by Defendant International Union United Automobile Aerospace &Agricultural Implement Workers of America (UAW) AFL-C10 (File, Joshua) |
| Filing 31 ATTORNEY Appearance for Defendant International Union United Automobile Aerospace &Agricultural Implement Workers of America (UAW) AFL-C10 by Joshua M File (File, Joshua) |
| Filing 30 ATTORNEY Appearance for Defendant Ford Motor Co by Emily Elizabeth Dory (Dory, Emily) |
| Filing 29 ATTORNEY Appearance for Defendant Ford Motor Co by Mark Howard Boyle (Boyle, Mark) |
| Filing 28 ATTORNEY Appearance for Defendant Ford Motor Co by Karen Kies DeGrand (DeGrand, Karen) |
| Filing 27 NOTICE of Correction regarding Patent/Trademark report #26 . (rc, ) |
| Filing 26 Entered in Error. (rc, ) Modified on 5/19/2022 (rc, ). |
| Filing 25 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Martha M. Pacold: Plaintiff's response to Defendant Ford Motor Company's motion to dismiss the amended complaint #22 is due by 6/16/2022. Defendant's reply is due by 7/7/2022. If plaintiff has questions about responding to a motion to dismiss, plaintiff may contact the Hibbler Help Desk, which can be reached at (312) 435-5691, or at the court's website: wwww.ilnd.uscourts.gov, and click on the link "Information for People Without Lawyers." (rao, ) |
| Filing 24 NOTICE by Ford Motor Co of Disclosure of Corporate Interests by Defendant Ford Motor Company (Millman, Timothy) |
| Filing 23 MEMORANDUM by Ford Motor Co in support of motion to dismiss #22 Plaintiff's Amended Complaint (Millman, Timothy) |
| Filing 22 MOTION by Defendant Ford Motor Co to dismiss Plaintiff's Amended Complaint #15 (Millman, Timothy) |
| Filing 21 ATTORNEY Appearance for Defendant Ford Motor Co by Timothy Scott Millman (Millman, Timothy) |
| Filing 20 SUMMONS Returned Executed as to International Union United Automobile Aerospace &Agricultural Implement Workers of America (UAW) AFL-C10 on 5/9/2022, answer due 5/30/2022. (nsf, ) |
| Filing 19 SUMMONS Returned Executed by U.S. Marshal as to Ford Motor Co on 4/27/2022, answer due 5/18/2022. (kl, ) |
Filing 17
ORDER: Given plaintiff's financial circumstances, see #10 , #12 , fees for service should be waived by the U.S. Marshals Service. Signed by the Honorable Martha M. Pacold on 4/20/2022. Mailed notice. (kl, )
|
| SUMMONS Issued as to Defendants Ford Motor Co, International Union United Automobile Aerospace & Agricultural Implement Workers of America (UAW) AFL-C10 (kl, ) |
| Filing 15 AMENDED complaint by LaWanda King. (kl, ) |
|
Filing 12
ORDER: On 1/18/22, this court denied plaintiff's motion for attorney representation and noted that plaintiff already paid the filing fee and did not seek to proceed IFP. #5 . The court told plaintiff that she may file an application to proceed in forma pauperis, which contains financial information necessary to determine whether plaintiff is unable to afford counsel, and a renewed motion for attorney representation, which must list efforts plaintiff has made to obtain counsel and attorneys plaintiff has contacted. Plaintiff has now filed an application to proceed in forma pauperis #10 and a motion for attorney representation #11 . The application to proceed in forma pauperis indicates that plaintiff has received approximately $40,000 over the past 12 months in income (listing some income from pensions, annuities, or life insurance, some income from disability or worker's compensation, and some income from stimulus funds). The docket reflects that plaintiff recently paid the filing fee. However, the application to proceed IFP also lists approximately $28,000 in debts and loans, as well as living expenses including monthly rent of $1,950, and states that plaintiff has become destitute and has suffered medical complications. Given plaintiff's recent payment of the filing fee, IFP status is not warranted, see 28 U.S.C. 1915(a)(1), but the affidavit does demonstrate inability to afford counsel, see 28 U.S.C. 1915(e)(1) ("The court may request an attorney to represent any person unable to afford counsel."). Thus, the motion to proceed IFP #10 is denied, but the court proceeds to consider whether to recruit counsel. At this time, the motion for attorney representation #11 is denied without prejudice. While "[t]here is no right to court-appointed counsel in federal civil litigation," Olson v. Morgan, 750 F.3d 708, 711 (7th Cir. 2014), the court may, in its discretion, recruit counsel under 28 U.S.C. 1915(e)(1). Several factors weigh against doing so at this time. This case is still in its infancy, defendants have not been served, and discovery has not commenced. Romanelli v. Suliene, 615 F.3d 847, 852 (7th Cir. 2010) (noting that counsel is often unnecessary at the beginning stages of a case). Plaintiff's motion indicates that she contacted numerous attorneys, but, in her opinion, "most attorneys hesitate when I mention Ford Motor Co" and others declined without explanation, don't practice in Illinois, and one stated he could not afford to handle the case. Further, at this very early stage in the litigation, there is little information about plaintiff's ability to competently litigate her claims pro se. Thus, recruitment of counsel is not currently warranted, but plaintiff may file a renewed motion for appointment of counsel in the future. The court reminds plaintiff that under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(m), a defendant must be served with a copy of the complaint within 90 days after a complaint is filed. Given plaintiff's financial circumstances, the U.S. Marshals Service is appointed to serve the defendants with summons and complaint once plaintiff has submitted completed2summonses and USM-285 forms and the Clerk's Office has issued summonses. By 2/15/21, plaintiff is directed to complete and submit to the Clerk's Office two summons forms (one form for each defendant) and two USM-285 forms (one form for each defendant; the USM-285 forms are necessary to assist the U.S. Marshals Service in serving process on defendants). Forms for summonses and USM-285 forms, as well as further information about proceeding pro se, are available on the court's website,www.ilnd.uscourts.gov, and click on the link "Information for People Without Lawyers." If plaintiff has further questions about completing these forms or proceeding pro se, plaintiff may contact the Hibbler Help Desk, which can be reached at (312) 435-5691, or at the same website. Signed by the Honorable Martha M. Pacold on 2/1/2022. Mailed notice. (kl, )
|
| Filing 11 MOTION by Plaintiff LaWanda King for attorney representation (kl, ) |
| Filing 10 APPLICATION by Plaintiff LaWanda King for leave to proceed in forma pauperis (kl, ) |
| Filing 9 NOTICE of Correction regarding #8 (kl, ) |
| Filing 8 COMPLAINT by LaWanda King (kl, ) Modified on 1/21/2022 (kl, ). (Main Document 8 replaced on 1/21/2022) (kl, ). |
| Filing 7 PRO SE Appearance by Plaintiff LaWanda King (kl, ) |
| Filing 6 COMPLAINT filed by LaWanda King; Jury Demand. (kl, ) |
|
Filing 5
ORDER: Plaintiff's motion for attorney representation #3 is denied. "There is no right to court-appointed counsel in federal civil litigation," Olson v. Morgan, 750 F.3d 708, 711 (7th Cir. 2014), but under 28 U.S.C. 1915(e)(1), the court may request that an attorney represent on a volunteer basis any person unable to afford counsel. Plaintiff has paid the filing fee and has not sought to proceed in forma pauperis. Thus, the record contains no basis to recruit counsel at this point. If plaintiff is unable to afford counsel, plaintiff may file an application to proceed in forma pauperis, which contains financial information necessary for the court to determine whether plaintiff is unable to afford counsel, and a renewed motion for attorney representation, which must list efforts plaintiff has made to obtain counsel and attorneys/law firms plaintiff has contacted. Further, the court reminds plaintiff that under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(m), a defendant must be served with a copy of the complaint within 90 days after a complaint is filed. If plaintiff has questions about proceeding pro se, plaintiff may contact the Hibbler Help Desk, which can be reached at (312) 435-5691, or www.ilnd.uscourts.gov, and click on the link "Information for People Without Lawyers." Forms, including the In Forma Pauperis Application and Financial Affidavit (Non-Prisoner Case), are available at the same link. Signed by the Honorable Martha M. Pacold on 1/18/2022. Mailed notice. (kl, )
|
| Filing 3 MOTION by Plaintiff LaWanda King for attorney representation (kl, ) |
| Filing 2 CIVIL Cover Sheet (kl, ) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT filed by LaWanda King; Jury Demand. (Attachments)(kl, ) |
| 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. (kl, ) |
| MAILED Clerk's Notice Pursuant to Local Rule 73.1(f) and Consent Form to LaWanda King (kl, ) |
| CASE ASSIGNED to the Honorable Martha M. Pacold. Designated as Magistrate Judge the Honorable Sheila M. Finnegan. 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.
