Edwards v. Starbucks Corporation
| Naomi Edwards |
| Starbucks Corporation d/b/a/ Starbucks Coffee Company |
| 1:2023cv16871 |
| December 18, 2023 |
| US District Court for the Northern District of Illinois |
| Jeffrey I Cummings |
| Civil Rights: Jobs |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1331 Federal Question |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on February 8, 2024. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 12 ANSWER to Complaint by Starbucks Corporation(Klein, Margot) |
| Filing 11 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Jeffrey I Cummings: Defendant's unopposed motion for extension of time to answer or otherwise plead #10 is granted. Defendant to answer or otherwise plead by 2/8/24. Mailed notice (mjc, ) |
| Filing 10 MOTION by Defendant Starbucks Corporation for extension of time (Klein, Margot) |
| Filing 9 ATTORNEY Appearance for Defendant Starbucks Corporation by Margot Klein (Klein, Margot) |
| Filing 8 NOTIFICATION of Affiliates pursuant to Local Rule 3.2 by Starbucks Corporation (Wolfe, Timothy) |
| Filing 7 ATTORNEY Appearance for Defendant Starbucks Corporation by Timothy Alan Wolfe of Ogletree, Deakins, Nash, Smoak & Stewart, P.C. (Wolfe, Timothy) |
| Filing 6 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 12/28/2023: Mailed notice. (tg, ) |
| Filing 5 SUMMONS Returned Executed by Naomi Edwards (Casper, Cass) |
| Filing 4 SUMMONS Returned Executed by Naomi Edwards as to Starbucks Corporation on 12/21/2023, answer due 1/11/2024. (Casper, Cass) |
| Filing 3 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Jeffrey I Cummings: This case has been assigned to the calendar of Judge Jeffrey I. Cummings. On or before 2/20/24, the parties shall file a joint initial status report in accordance with the template available on the Court's website under the case management procedure titled "Initial Status Report for Newly Filed Cases." The parties shall also review all of the case management procedures and standing orders available on the Court's website. Initial tracking status hearing set for 3/1/24 at 9:00 a.m. to track the case only (no appearance is required and the case will not be called). Instead, the Court will review the parties' joint initial status report and enter further orders as appropriate. Mailed notice (cc, ) |
| Filing 2 ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff Naomi Edwards by Cass Thomas Casper (Casper, Cass) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT filed by Naomi Edwards; Jury Demand. Filing fee $ 405, receipt number AILNDC-21433473. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit, #2 Exhibit, #3 Civil Cover Sheet)(Casper, Cass) |
| CASE ASSIGNED to the Honorable Jeffrey I Cummings. Designated as Magistrate Judge the Honorable Sunil R. Harjani. Case assignment: Random assignment. (Civil Category 2). (mcp, ) |
| SUMMONS Issued as to Defendant Starbucks Corporation (smb, ) |
| 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. (mcp, ) |
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: Edwards v. Starbucks Corporation | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Plaintiff: Naomi Edwards | |
| Represented By: | Cass Thomas Casper |
| 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: Starbucks Corporation d/b/a/ Starbucks Coffee Company | |
| Represented By: | Timothy Alan Wolfe |
| Represented By: | Margot Klein |
| 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.
