Erickson v. The UPS Store, Inc. et al
Plaintiff: H Erickson and H. Erickson
Defendant: The UPS Store, Inc., UPS Store, Lindsey Schultz (Wilczewski), Bruce Peterson, Doe and Doe a corporation registered by Schultz and Peterson doing business as UPS Store #1898, in its own right
Case Number: 1:2022cv06155
Filed: November 4, 2022
Court: US District Court for the Northern District of Illinois
Presiding Judge: Ronald A Guzman
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights: Other
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1343 Violation of Civil Rights
Jury Demanded By: Plaintiff
Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on December 29, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
December 29, 2022 Filing 13 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, )
December 22, 2022 Filing 12 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Ronald A. Guzman: Defendants' clarified motion for an extension of time to answer or otherwise plead #11 is granted. Defendants shall file their responsive pleadings no later than January 30, 2023. If motions to dismiss will be filed, the Court encourages the parties to file a combined motion, to the extent possible, to avoid duplicative filings. The dates set in the Court's December 21, 2022 order directing the parties to confer and file an initial status report and proposed discovery schedule stand. The parties are directed to confer no later than January 31, 2023 to discuss the nature and bases of their claims and defenses and the possibilities for a prompt settlement or resolution of the case, and they shall also discuss deadlines for any Rule 26(a)(1) disclosures that have not already been exchanged and a proposed discovery plan. Lead counsel are directed to participate. In lieu of an initial status hearing, the parties shall file a joint written initial status report and proposed discovery plan by February 7, 2023. The Court notes that it generally does not suspend discovery while a motion to dismiss is pending. Failure or refusal to participate in the ordered conference or to cooperate in the preparation of the written report may constitute a basis for sanctions. After the Court receives the parties' written report and proposed discovery plan, it will issue an order setting a discovery schedule, if appropriate. Mailed notice. (exr, )
December 22, 2022 Filing 11 MOTION by Defendants Bruce Peterson, Lindsey Schultz (Wilczewski), The UPS Store, Inc. for extension of time to file answer or other responsive pleading by Agreement (Ellis, John)
December 21, 2022 Filing 10 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Ronald A. Guzman: Defendants' unopposed motion for an extension of time to answer or otherwise plead #9 is granted. Defendants shall file their responsive pleadings no later than January 19, 2023. If motions to dismiss will be filed, the Court encourages the parties to file a combined motion, to the extent possible, to avoid duplicative filings. The parties are directed to confer no later than January 31, 2023 to discuss the nature and bases of their claims and defenses and the possibilities for a prompt settlement or resolution of the case, and they shall also discuss deadlines for any Rule 26(a)(1) disclosures that have not already been exchanged and a proposed discovery plan. Lead counsel are directed to participate. In lieu of an initial status hearing, the parties shall file a joint written initial status report and proposed discovery plan by February 7, 2023. Failure or refusal to participate in such a conference or to cooperate in the preparation of the written report may constitute a basis for sanctions. After the Court receives the parties' written report, it will issue an order setting a discovery schedule, if appropriate. Mailed notice. (exr, )
December 21, 2022 Filing 9 MOTION by Defendants Bruce Peterson, Lindsey Schultz (Wilczewski), The UPS Store, Inc. for extension of time to file answer or other responsive pleading by Agreement (Ellis, John)
December 21, 2022 Filing 8 ATTORNEY Appearance for Defendant The UPS Store, Inc. by John C. Ellis (Ellis, John)
December 12, 2022 Filing 7 SUMMONS returned executed by U.S Marshal's as to Bruce Peterson, Linsey Schultz, The UPS Store, on 12/6/2022, answer due 12/27/2022. (cxr, ) Modified on 12/13/2022 (cxr, ).
December 8, 2022 Filing 6 SUMMONS Returned Executed by H. Erickson. (jn, )
November 14, 2022 SUMMONS Issued to the US Marshal Service as to Defendants Bruce Peterson, Lindsey Schultz (Wilczewski), The UPS Store, Inc. (kl, ) Modified on 11/14/2022 (kl, ).
November 8, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 5 ORDER: For the reasons stated, Plaintiff's motion to proceed in forma pauperis #3 is granted. Plaintiff's request for the recruitment of counsel is denied without prejudice to renewal. The Court appoints the U.S. Marshals Service to serve Defendants. The Court advises Plaintiff that a completed USM-285 form for each defendant is required to be filed for service by the Marshals Service. The Marshal will not attempt service on the defendants unless and until the required form is received. Therefore, Plaintiff must complete a service form for each defendant and return the form to the Clerk of Court. Failure to return the USM-285 forms by December 5, 2022 may result in dismissal of the case for failure to prosecute. Upon Plaintiff's filing of the USM-285 forms, the Court authorizes the Marshal to send a request for waiver of service consistent with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(d) before attempting personal service. Plaintiff is encouraged to visit the website for the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois (www.ilnd.uscourts.gov) for resources for litigants representing themselves. Signed by the Honorable Ronald A. Guzman on 11/8/2022. Mailed notice. (kp, )
November 4, 2022 Filing 4 PRO SE Appearance by Plaintiff H Erickson. (gcy, )
November 4, 2022 Filing 3 APPLICATION by Plaintiff H Erickson for leave to proceed in forma pauperis and affidavit. (gcy, )
November 4, 2022 Filing 2 CIVIL Cover Sheet. (gcy, )
November 4, 2022 Filing 1 RECEIVED Complaint and 1 copies by H Erickson. (gcy, )

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 this case: Erickson v. The UPS Store, Inc. et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: The UPS Store, Inc.
Represented By: John C. Ellis
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: UPS Store
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: Lindsey Schultz (Wilczewski)
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: Bruce Peterson
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: Doe
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: Doe a corporation registered by Schultz and Peterson doing business as UPS Store #1898, in its own right
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 ]
Plaintiff: H Erickson
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 ]
Plaintiff: H. Erickson
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.


Why Is My Information Online?