Doe v. Roe et al
Jane Doe |
John Roe and Massachusetts Institute of Technology |
1:2023cv11935 |
August 23, 2023 |
US District Court for the District of Massachusetts |
Jennifer C Boal |
William G Young |
Civil Rights: Jobs |
28 U.S.C. ยง 1441 Notice of Removal |
Plaintiff |
Docket Report
This docket was last retrieved on September 29, 2023. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
Document Text |
---|
Filing 14 Judge William G. Young: ELECTRONIC ORDER entered granting #12 MOTION for Extension of Time to October 20, 2023 to File Response/Reply as to #7 MOTION to Dismiss , #7 MOTION to Dismiss . Response due by 10/20/2023. Motion allowed. No further continuances. (Gaudet, Jennifer) |
Filing 13 NOTICE of Appearance by Samantha Vasques on behalf of Massachusetts Institute of Technology, John Roe (Vasques, Samantha) |
Filing 12 MOTION for Extension of Time to October 20, 2023 to File Response as to #7 MOTION to Dismiss by Jane Doe. (Warnock, Douglas) |
Filing 11 ELECTRONIC NOTICE of Case Reassignment. Judge William G. Young assigned to case. If the trial Judge issues an Order of Reference of any matter in this case to a Magistrate Judge, the matter will be transmitted to Magistrate Judge Jennifer C. Boal. (Horvath, Courtney) Modified on 9/7/2023 (Horvath, Courtney). |
Filing 10 Refusal to Consent to Proceed Before a US Magistrate Judge. . (Lapp, Daryl) |
Filing 9 ELECTRONIC NOTICE TO COUNSEL: Notification forms indicating whether or not a party has consented to proceed before a U.S. Magistrate Judge have not been received in the Clerk's Office. The submission of the form is mandatory. Completed forms shall be filed promptly. Additional forms can be obtained on the Court's web page at http://www.mad.uscourts.gov. (York, Steve) |
Filing 8 MEMORANDUM in Support re #7 MOTION to Dismiss filed by Massachusetts Institute of Technology, John Roe. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A to Memorandum ISO Motion to Dismiss)(Lapp, Daryl) |
Filing 7 MOTION to Dismiss by Massachusetts Institute of Technology, John Roe.(Lapp, Daryl) |
Filing 6 STATE COURT Record. (Lapp, Daryl) |
Filing 5 Certified Copy of Notice of Removal Provided to Defense Counsel by Email (Horvath, Courtney) |
Filing 4 NOTICE of Case Assignment. Magistrate Judge Jennifer C. Boal assigned to case. Plaintiff's counsel, or defendant's counsel if this case was initiated by the filing of a Notice of Removal, are directed to the Notice and Procedures regarding Consent to Proceed before the Magistrate Judge which can be downloaded #here. These documents will be mailed to counsel not receiving notice electronically. Pursuant to General Order 09-3, until the Court receives for filing either a consent to the Magistrate Judge's jurisdiction or the reassignment of the case to a District Judge, the initial assignment of a civil case to the Magistrate Judge is a referral to the Magistrate Judge under 28 USC 636(b) for all pretrial non-dispositive matters and Report and Recommendations, but not for the Rule 16(b) scheduling conference. (Cook, Savannah) |
Filing 3 CORPORATE DISCLOSURE STATEMENT by Massachusetts Institute of Technology. (Lapp, Daryl) |
Filing 2 NOTICE of Appearance by Daryl J. Lapp on behalf of Massachusetts Institute of Technology, John Roe (Lapp, Daryl) |
Filing 1 NOTICE OF REMOVAL by Massachusetts Institute of Technology, John Roe ( Filing fee: $ 402, receipt number AMADC-10004857 Fee Status: Filing Fee paid) (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A-State Court Complaint, #2 Civil Cover Sheet and Category Sheet)(Lapp, Daryl) |
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 Massachusetts 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.