Bridgeforth v. Nordstrom, Inc.
| Kelly Marie Bridgeforth |
| Nordstrom, Inc. |
| 1:2022cv07240 |
| December 23, 2022 |
| US District Court for the Northern District of Illinois |
| Manish S Shah |
| Civil Rights: Americans with Disabilities - Employment |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 451 Employment Discrimination |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on February 1, 2023. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 12 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Manish S. Shah: Plaintiff shall respond to the motion to compel arbitration by 3/1/23, and defendant may reply by 3/22/23. No appearance on the motion on 2/7/23 is necessary and no status report on 2/23/23 is necessary. The court will rule by cm/ecf. Discovery is stayed for now, without prejudice to plaintiff seeking to lift the stay. Notices mailed. (psm, ) |
| Filing 11 ATTORNEY Appearance for Defendant Nordstrom, Inc. by Kevin David Kelly (Kelly, Kevin) |
| Filing 10 NOTIFICATION of Affiliates pursuant to Local Rule 3.2 by Nordstrom, Inc. (Klinker, John) |
| Filing 9 NOTICE of Motion by John William Klinker for presentment of motion to dismiss/lack of jurisdiction,, motion to compel #7 before Honorable Manish S. Shah on 2/7/2023 at 09:45 AM. (Klinker, John) |
| Filing 8 MEMORANDUM by Nordstrom, Inc. in support of motion to dismiss/lack of jurisdiction,, motion to compel #7 (Klinker, John) |
| Filing 7 MOTION by Defendant Nordstrom, Inc. to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction , MOTION by Defendant Nordstrom, Inc. to dismiss , MOTION by Defendant Nordstrom, Inc. to compel (Klinker, John) |
| Filing 6 ATTORNEY Appearance for Defendant Nordstrom, Inc. by John William Klinker (Klinker, John) |
| Filing 5 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Manish S. Shah: By 2/23/23, the parties shall file a joint initial status report. A template for the Initial Status Report, setting forth the information required, may be found at http://www.ilnd.uscourts.gov/Judges.aspx by clicking on Judge Shah's name and then again on the link entitled 'Initial Status Conferences.' Notices mailed. (psm, ) |
| SUMMONS Issued as to Defendant Nordstrom, Inc. (jb, ) |
| Filing 4 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, ) |
| CASE ASSIGNED to the Honorable Manish S. Shah. Designated as Magistrate Judge the Honorable Sunil R. Harjani. Case assignment: Random assignment. (jk2, ) |
| 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. (jk2, ) |
| Filing 3 ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff Kelly Marie Bridgeforth by Rose E. Joshua (Joshua, Rose) |
| Filing 2 CIVIL Cover Sheet (Joshua, Rose) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT FOR EMPLOYMENT DISCRIMINATION filed by Kelly Marie Bridgeforth; Jury Demand. Filing fee $ 402, receipt number AILNDC-20172621. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit Exhibit A, #2 Exhibit Exhibit B)(Joshua, Rose) |
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: Bridgeforth v. Nordstrom, Inc. | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Plaintiff: Kelly Marie Bridgeforth | |
| Represented By: | Rose E. Joshua |
| 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: Nordstrom, Inc. | |
| Represented By: | Kevin David Kelly |
| Represented By: | John William Klinker |
| 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.
