Sullivan v. NetApp, Inc.
| Terence Sullivan |
| NetApp, Inc. |
| 1:2022cv06871 |
| December 7, 2022 |
| US District Court for the Northern District of Illinois |
| Edmond E Chang |
| Beth W Jantz |
| Civil Rights: Jobs |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 2000 e Job Discrimination (Employment) |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on February 3, 2023. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 13 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Beth W. Jantz: This case has been referred to Magistrate Judge Jantz for discovery supervision with authority to adjust all deadlines #11 #12 . The parties are directed to review Judge Jantz's standing orders on initial status conferences, however, no initial status report need be filed. Rather, the Court sets the following additional agreed discovery deadlines as outlined in the parties' Rule 26(f) report #10 : Written discovery requests are to be issued by 3/27/23, and all fact discovery is to be completed by 12/15/23. A telephonic initial status conference is scheduled for 5/10/23 at 10:30 a.m. To join the status conference by phone, counsel shall dial 888-273-3658 and enter access code 2217918. Members of the public and media will be able to call in to listen to this hearing as well. Persons granted remote access to proceedings are reminded of the general prohibition against photographing, recording, and rebroadcasting of court proceedings. Violation of these prohibitions may result in sanctions, including removal of court issued media credentials, restricted entry to future hearings, denial of entry to future hearings, or any other sanctions deemed necessary by the Court. Mailed notice. (as, ) |
| Filing 12 Pursuant to Local Rule 72.1, this case is hereby referred to the calendar of Honorable Beth W. Jantz for the purpose of holding proceedings related to: discovery supervision (including the authority to adjust all deadlines). (mw, ) Emailed notice. |
| Filing 11 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Edmond E. Chang: On review of the status report, R. 10, the answer deadline is 02/20/2023. Rule 26(a)(1) disclosures due 03/20/2023. The remainder of discovery supervision is referred to the magistrate judge (including the authority to adjust all deadlines). Rule 16(b) deadline to add parties or amend pleadings is 07/05/2023. **No summary judgment motion may be filed before the close of fact discovery without prior authorization of the Court.** The tracking status hearing of 02/03/2023 is reset to 06/09/2023 at 8:30 a.m., but to track the case only (no appearance is required, the case will not be called). Emailed notice (mw, ) |
| Filing 10 REPORT of Rule 26(f) Planning Meeting by NetApp, Inc. (Cloutier, Kevin) |
| Filing 9 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 8 WAIVER OF SERVICE returned executed by Terence Sullivan. NetApp, Inc. waiver sent on 12/20/2022, answer due 2/20/2023. (Servos, Diana) |
| Filing 7 ATTORNEY Appearance for Defendant NetApp, Inc. by Katherine H. Oblak (Oblak, Katherine) |
| Filing 6 ATTORNEY Appearance for Defendant NetApp, Inc. by Kevin M Cloutier (Cloutier, Kevin) |
| Filing 5 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Edmond E. Chang: Initial tracking status hearing set for 02/03/2023 at 8:30 a.m. to track the case only (no appearance is required, the case will not be called). Instead, the Court will set the case schedule after reviewing the written status report. The parties must file a joint initial status report with the content described in the attached status report requirements by 01/26/2023. Plaintiff must still file the report even if Defendant has not responded to requests to craft a joint report. If Defendant has not been served, then Plaintiff must complete the part of the report on the progress of service. Also, counsel (or the parties, if proceeding pro se) must carefully review Judge Chang's Case Management Procedures, available online at ilnd.uscourts.gov (navigate to Judges / District Judges / Judge Edmond E. Chang). Because the Procedures are occasionally revised, counsel (or the party, if proceeding pro se) must read them anew even if the counsel or the party has appeared before Judge Chang in other cases. Emailed notice (Attachments: #1 Status Report Requirements) (mw, ) |
| Filing 4 ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff Terence Sullivan by Diana C. Servos (Servos, Diana) |
| Filing 3 CIVIL Cover Sheet (Servos, Diana) |
| Filing 2 COMPLAINT filed by Terence Sullivan; Jury Demand. (Servos, Diana) |
| Filing 1 Entered in Error. Modified on 12/7/2022 (kl, ). |
| CASE ASSIGNED to the Honorable Edmond E. Chang. Designated as Magistrate Judge the Honorable Beth W. Jantz. Case assignment: Random assignment. (khg, ) |
| 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. (khg, ) |
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
| Search for this case: Sullivan v. NetApp, Inc. | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Plaintiff: Terence Sullivan | |
| Represented By: | Diana C. Servos |
| 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: NetApp, Inc. | |
| Represented By: | Katherine H. Oblak |
| Represented By: | Kevin M Cloutier |
| 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.
