Parham v. Uber Technologies, Inc. et al
Plaintiff: Schatze Parham
Defendant: Uber Technologies, Inc., Rasier, LLC and Tony Enongene
Case Number: 8:2021cv01802
Filed: July 21, 2021
Court: US District Court for the District of Maryland
Presiding Judge: Deborah L. Boardman
Referring Judge: George Jarrod Hazel
Nature of Suit: Motor Vehicle
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 1332
Jury Demanded By: Plaintiff
Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on September 1, 2021. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
September 1, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 8 ORDER granting #4 Parties' Joint Motion to Extend Deadlines. Signed by Judge Deborah L. Boardman on 9/1/2021. (bmhs, Deputy Clerk)
August 30, 2021 Filing 7 NOTICE of Appearance by Catherine A Hanrahan on behalf of Rasier, LLC, Uber Technologies, Inc. (Hanrahan, Catherine)
August 30, 2021 Filing 6 NOTICE of Appearance by Timothy S Carey on behalf of Rasier, LLC, Uber Technologies, Inc. (Carey, Timothy)
August 30, 2021 Filing 5 QC NOTICE: #3 Notice of Appearance filed by Rasier, LLC, Uber Technologies, Inc. was filed incorrectly. **Each attorney must file their Notice of Appearance using their CM/ECF login to be added as counsel to a case. (bmhs, Deputy Clerk)
August 27, 2021 Filing 4 Joint MOTION for Extension of Time of All Court Deadlines by Rasier, LLC, Uber Technologies, Inc. (Attachments: #1 Text of Proposed Order)(Carey, Timothy)
August 27, 2021 Filing 3 NOTICE of Appearance by Timothy S Carey on behalf of Rasier, LLC, Uber Technologies, Inc. (Carey, Timothy)
August 25, 2021 Case Reassigned to Judge Deborah L. Boardman. Judge George Jarrod Hazel no longer assigned to the case. (ybs, Deputy Clerk)
July 21, 2021 Filing 2 Summons Issued 21 days as to Tony Enongene, Rasier, LLC, Uber Technologies, Inc..(dg3s, Deputy Clerk)
July 21, 2021 Filing 1 COMPLAINT against Tony Enongene, Rasier, LLC, Uber Technologies, Inc. ( Filing fee $ 402 receipt number 0416-9391593.), filed by Schatze Parham. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet, #2 Summons, #3 Summons, #4 Summons)(Watters, Keith)

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 this case: Parham v. Uber Technologies, Inc. et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Schatze Parham
Represented By: Keith Winston Watters
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: Uber Technologies, Inc.
Represented By: Timothy S Carey
Represented By: Catherine A Hanrahan
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: Rasier, LLC
Represented By: Timothy S Carey
Represented By: Catherine A Hanrahan
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: Tony Enongene
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.


Why Is My Information Online?