Guzman v. Packard Pacifica, Inc.
| Roguelio Guzman |
| Packard Pacifica, Inc. and Packard Pacifica, Inc. doing business as Holiday Inn Lafayette-City Centre |
| 4:2018cv00009 |
| February 19, 2018 |
| US District Court for the Northern District of Indiana |
| Lafayette Office |
| Tippecanoe |
| Joseph S Van Bokkelen |
| John E Martin |
| Labor: Fair Standards |
| 29 U.S.C. § 201 Fair Labor Standards Act |
| Defendant |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on August 30, 2018. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| CASE DISMISSED with prejudice pursuant to Rule 41(a)(1) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure per #21 Stipulation to Dismiss. (jss) |
| Filing 21 STIPULATION to Dismiss by Defendant Packard Pacifica, Inc.. (Kelso, Robert) |
Filing 20
ORDER granting #19 Motion to Withdraw as Attorney. Attorney Bianca V Black ORDERED WITHDRAWN. Text entry order. By Magistrate Judge John E Martin on 8/8/2018. (smb)
|
| Filing 19 MOTION to Withdraw as Attorney by Defendant Packard Pacifica, Inc.. (Black, Bianca) |
| Filing 18 RULE 16 PRELIMINARY PRETRIAL CONFERENCE held by teleph 5/24/2018 before Magistrate Judge John E Martin. Pla appeared by atty Andrew Jones. Dft appeared by atty Bianca Black. Planning Meeting Report #17 is approved as modified. Any motion for leave to amend pleadings to be filed by 7/13/2018. Non-expert Discovery deadline is 11/7/2018. Expert Discovery deadline is 5/3/2019. Plaintiff expert witness disclosures and reports to be delivered to the defendant by 2/8/2019. Defendant expert witness disclosures and reports to be delivered to the plaintiff by 3/22/2019. R26(e) supplements due by 7/5/2019. Initial Disclosures to be exchanged by 7/13/2018. Mediator Selection Deadline is 7/13/2018. Mediation to be completed and report filed by 2/8/2019. Magistrate Consent forms ddl extended to 6/14/2018. The summary judgment ddl per FRCP 56 shall not apply. All other dates/ddl to be set by the presiding trial judge upon conclusion of discovery. Parties are not sure whether expert discovery will be needed and are directed to file a notice with the Court if discovery concludes prior to the established deadline. (#FTR.)(smb) |
| Filing 17 REPORT of Rule 26(f) Planning Meeting. (Jones, Andrew) |
| Filing 16 AMENDED ANSWER to #1 Complaint by Packard Pacifica, Inc..(Black, Bianca) |
|
Filing 15
ORDER STRIKING #14 Answer to Complaint filed by Packard Pacifica, Inc. for failure to comply with Local Rule 10-1(a), requiring responsive pleadings under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 7(a) to: (1) restate verbatim the paragraphs from the pleading they respond to; and (2) immediately following each restated paragraph, state the response to that paragraph. Text entry order. By Magistrate Judge John E Martin on 4/26/2018. (smb)
|
| Filing 14 (Stricken 4/26/18) ANSWER to #1 Complaint by Packard Pacifica, Inc..(Black, Bianca) Modified on 4/26/2018 to show stricken (smb). |
| Filing 13 MAGISTRATE JUDGE CONSENT FORMS sent to all parties (Standard Track).. (smb) |
|
Filing 12
ORDER & NOTICE OF HEARING: Rule 16 Preliminary Pretrial Conference set for 5/24/2018 11:30 AM Central in US District Court - Hammond before Magistrate Judge John E Martin. Proposed joint discovery plan in accordance with FRCP 26(f) due by 5/18/2018. Signed by Magistrate Judge John E Martin on 4/3/2018. (smb)
|
|
Filing 11
ORDER: Each party and each attorney in this case shall take reasonable steps to preserve electronically stored information (ESI) that is relevant to any claim or defense in this case, whether or not the information is admissible at trial. This requirement relates back to the point in time when the party or attorney reasonably anticipated litigation about these matters. Text entry order. By Magistrate Judge John E Martin on 4/3/2018. (smb)
|
| Set/Reset Deadlines: Per #10 Packard Pacifica, Inc. answer due by 4/24/2018 (rmc) |
| Filing 10 AGREED NOTICE to extend time to file answer filed by Packard Pacifica, Inc. ; answer due by 4/24/2018. (Black, Bianca) |
|
Filing 9
ORDER denying #6 Motion for Extension of Time to Answer with leave to re-file a corrected motion that complies with the applicable Rules. Signed by Magistrate Judge John E Martin on 3/26/18. (kjp)
|
| Filing 8 NOTICE of Appearance by Robert M Kelso on behalf of Packard Pacifica, Inc. (Kelso, Robert) |
| Filing 7 *** FILING ERROR - ATTORNEY REFILED DOCUMENT (SEE DE#8 ) *** NOTICE of Appearance by Robert M Kelso on behalf of Packard Pacifica, Inc. (Kelso, Robert) Modified on 3/22/2018 (mtr). Modified on 3/23/2018 (mtr). |
| Filing 6 MOTION for Extension of Time to File Answer re #1 Complaint by Defendant Packard Pacifica, Inc.. (Black, Bianca) |
| Filing 5 NOTICE of Appearance by Bianca V Black on behalf of Packard Pacifica, Inc. (Black, Bianca) |
| Filing 4 SUMMONS Returned Executed by Roguelio Guzman. Packard Pacifica, Inc. served on 3/6/2018, answer due 3/27/2018. (Jones, Andrew) |
| Filing 3 Summons Issued as to Packard Pacifica, Inc.. NOTE:The attached document is accessible by court personnel only. Summons forms that were electronically submitted to the court for issuance will be returned to counsel via e-mail. (sct) |
| Judge Joseph S Van Bokkelen and Magistrate Judge John E Martin added. (New Case) (sct) |
| Filing 2 NOTICE of Appearance by Andrew G Jones on behalf of Roguelio Guzman (Jones, Andrew) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT against Packard Pacifica, Inc.( Filing fee $ 400 receipt number 0755-3488925.), filed by Roguelio Guzman. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet, #2 Proposed Summons)(Jones, Andrew) |
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 Indiana 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
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.
