Reed v. D D S Dentures & Implant Solutions of Monroe
| David Reed |
| DDS Dentures and Implant Solutions of Monroe and D D S Dentures & Implant Solutions of Monroe |
| 5:2019cv00227 |
| February 22, 2019 |
| US District Court for the Western District of Louisiana |
| Elizabeth E Foote |
| Mark L Hornsby |
| Civil Rights: Jobs |
| 29 U.S.C. ยง 2601 |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on February 27, 2019. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 3 ELECTRONIC JURISDICTIONAL REVIEW FINDING: Having reviewed the pleadings, and any amended pleadings, the court finds that subject matter jurisdiction exists pursuant to: 28 U.S.C. section 1331. This finding is preliminary and may be reconsidered sua sponte or on appropriate motion. Signed by Magistrate Judge Mark L Hornsby on 2/27/2019. (crt,Stephens, M) |
| Filing 2 SUMMONS ISSUED as to D D S Dentures & Implant Solutions of Monroe (crt,Bunting, M) |
| Judge Elizabeth E Foote and Magistrate Judge Mark L Hornsby added. (crt,Bunting, M) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT against D D S Dentures & Implant Solutions of Monroe with Jury Demand (Filing fee $400, receipt number 0536-3883755) filed by David Reed. (Attachments: #1 Civil cover sheet)(Attorney Allison Anne Jones added to party David Reed(pty:pla))(aty,Jones, Allison) Modified docket text on 2/26/2019 (Bunting, M). |
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 Louisiana Western 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.
