Kim v. Montgomery Custom Tailor, Inc. et al
| Sung Jin Kim |
| Montgomery Custom Tailor, Inc., Peter Lim and Lisa Lim |
| 8:2020cv01050 |
| April 23, 2020 |
| US District Court for the District of Maryland |
| Paul W Grimm |
| Labor: Fair Standards |
| 29 U.S.C. ยง 201 |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on April 24, 2020. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 6
LETTER ORDER Regarding the Filing of Motions. Signed by Judge Paul W. Grimm on 4/24/2020. (ybs, Deputy Clerk)
|
| Filing 5 Summons Issued 21 days as to Lisa Lim, Peter Lim, Montgomery Custom Tailor, Inc.. (Attachments: #1 Summons)(ybs, Deputy Clerk) |
| Filing 4 NOTICE by Sung Jin Kim re #2 Notice (Other) Proposed summons (Ryu, Hyunkweon) |
| Filing 3 QC NOTICE: #2 Notice (Other) filed by Sung Jin Kim was filed incorrectly. **The following attachments or exhibits are missing - Summons. Please file summons for additional defendant. To correct this problem, file Summons using the event Notice (Other) and link Summons to #2 . (ybs, Deputy Clerk) |
| Filing 2 NOTICE by Sung Jin KIM re #1 Complaint Proposed summons (Attachments: #1 proposed summons)(Ryu, Hyunkweon) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT against Montgomery Custom Tailor, Inc et al against Sung Jin KIM ( Filing fee $ 400 receipt number 0416-8623556.), filed by Sung Jin KIM. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet)(Ryu, Hyunkweon) |
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 Maryland 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.
