Stepp v. MNJ Technologies Direct, Inc.
| Darya V Stepp |
| MNJ Technologies Direct, Inc. |
| 1:2023cv14865 |
| October 13, 2023 |
| US District Court for the Northern District of Illinois |
| Steven C Seeger |
| Civil Rights: Jobs |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1343 Violation of Civil Rights |
| Both |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on December 11, 2023. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 9 ANSWER to Complaint with Jury Demand and Affirmative Defenses by MNJ Technologies Direct, Inc.(Curry, Bryan) |
| Filing 8 ATTORNEY Appearance for Defendant MNJ Technologies Direct, Inc. by Bryan Eliot Curry (Curry, Bryan) |
| Filing 7 WAIVER OF SERVICE returned executed by Darya V Stepp. MNJ Technologies Direct, Inc. waiver sent on 10/18/2023, answer due 12/18/2023. (Sherwood, Jason) |
| Filing 6 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Steven C. Seeger: There is no need for a certificate of service for a court filing when all parties of record receive a copy through CM/ECF. Under the Local Rules, "[a] certificate of service is required only when service of a document filed on the Court's E-Filing system is made on a recipient who is not an E-Filer listed on the docket of the proceeding." See L.R. 5.5(a); see also Fed. R. Civ. P. 5(d)(1)(B) ("No certificate of service is required when a paper is served by filing it with the court's electronic-filing system."). The Court handles service through CM/ECF. In effect, the CM/ECF header is the certificate of service. Save yourself the work, and the trouble. Mailed notice. (jjr, ) |
| Filing 5 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Steven C. Seeger: An initial status report is due by January 5, 2024. Counsel must read the Standing Order entitled "Initial Status Conferences and Joint Initial Status Reports" on the Court's website. The parties must confer as required by Rule 26(f) about the nature, scope, and duration of discovery. The parties must submit two documents to the Court. First, the parties must file the Joint Initial Status Report under Rule 26(f) on the docket. A Word version of the Joint Initial Status Report is available on the Court's website. All parties must participate in the preparation and filing of the Joint Initial Status Report. The Court requires a joint report, so a filing by one side or the other is not sufficient. Second, the parties must email a Word version of a proposed Scheduling Order under Rule 16(b) to the Court's proposed order inbox. Lead counsel for the parties must participate in filing the initial status report. Plaintiff must serve this Order on all other parties. If the defendant has not been served with process, plaintiff's counsel must contact the Courtroom Deputy at jessica_j_ramos@ilnd.uscourts.gov to reschedule the initial status report deadline. Plaintiff should not file the Joint Initial Status Report before the defendant(s) has been served with process. The parties must discuss settlement in good faith and make a serious attempt to resolve this case amicably. All counsel of record must read and comply with this Court's Standing Orders on its webpage. Please pay special attention to the Standing Orders about Depositions and Discovery. Mailed notice. (jjr, ) |
| Filing 4 ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff Darya V Stepp by Albert F Ferolie (Ferolie, Albert) |
| Filing 3 ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff Darya V Stepp by Jason Harris Sherwood (Sherwood, Jason) |
| Filing 2 CIVIL Cover Sheet (Sherwood, Jason) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT filed by Darya V Stepp; Jury Demand. Filing fee $ 402, receipt number AILNDC-21218275.(Sherwood, Jason) |
| 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. (smb, ) |
| CASE ASSIGNED to the Honorable Steven C. Seeger. Designated as Magistrate Judge the Honorable Jeffrey Cole. Case assignment: Random assignment. (Civil Category 2). (smb, ) |
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: Stepp v. MNJ Technologies Direct, Inc. | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Plaintiff: Darya V Stepp | |
| Represented By: | Albert F Ferolie |
| Represented By: | Jason Harris Sherwood |
| 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: MNJ Technologies Direct, Inc. | |
| Represented By: | Bryan Eliot Curry |
| 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.
