Bonomo v. The Boeing Company
Jeff Bonomo |
The Boeing Company |
4:2019cv03394 |
December 30, 2019 |
US District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri |
Sarah E Pitlyk |
Civil Rights: Jobs |
28 U.S.C. ยง 1332 |
Both |
Docket Report
This docket was last retrieved on February 25, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
Document Text |
---|
Filing 12 JOINT SCHEDULING PLAN by Plaintiff Jeff Bonomo. . (Ponder, Douglas) |
Filing 11 Defendant's ANSWER to Complaint by The Boeing Company.(Metcalf, Andrew) |
Filing 10 ORDER SETTING RULE 16 CONFERENCE; This case is assigned to Track: 2. Joint Scheduling Plan due by 2/24/2020. Rule 16 Conference set for 3/5/2020 01:00 PM in Chambers before District Judge Sarah E Pitlyk. [SEE ORDER FOR FULL DETAILS]Signed by District Judge Sarah E Pitlyk on 1/22/20. (KEK) |
Filing 9 Docket Text ORDER: Re: #6 Consent MOTION for Extension of Time to File Answer or otherwise plead by Defendant The Boeing Company. (Metcalf, Andrew) filed by The Boeing Company ; ORDERED GRANTED The Boeing Company answer due 2/5/2020. The Boeing Company answer due 2/5/2020. Signed by District Judge Sarah E Pitlyk on 1/2/20. (ARL) |
Filing 8 NOTICE OF FILING NOTICE OF REMOVAL filed by Defendant The Boeing Company Sent To: State Court - Executed (Metcalf, Andrew) |
Case Opening Notification: All non-governmental organizational parties (corporations, limited liability companies, limited liability partnerships) must file Disclosure of Organizational Interests Certificate # (moed-0001.pdf). Judge Assigned: Honorable Sarah E. Pitlyk. (MFG) |
Filing 7 Petition (Removal/Transfer) Received From: Circuit Court of St. Louis County, filed by Jeff Bonomo. (Attachments: #1 Attachment)(MFG) |
Filing 6 Consent MOTION for Extension of Time to File Answer or otherwise plead by Defendant The Boeing Company. (Metcalf, Andrew) |
Filing 5 ENTRY of Appearance by Gregg M. Lemley for Defendant The Boeing Company. (Lemley, Gregg) |
Filing 4 NOTICE OF FILING NOTICE OF REMOVAL filed by Defendant The Boeing Company Sent To: Plaintiff (Metcalf, Andrew) |
Filing 3 DISCLOSURE OF ORGANIZATIONAL INTERESTS CERTIFICATE by Defendant The Boeing Company.. (Metcalf, Andrew) |
Filing 2 ENTRY of Appearance by Andrew L. Metcalf for Defendant The Boeing Company. (Metcalf, Andrew) |
Filing 1 NOTICE OF REMOVAL from Circuit Court, St. Louis County, case number 19SL-CC05061, with receipt number AMOEDC-7660923, in the amount of $400 Jury Demand,, filed by The Boeing Company. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A. State Court File, #2 Original Filing Form, #3 Civil Cover Sheet)(Metcalf, 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 Missouri Eastern 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
Search for this case: Bonomo v. The Boeing Company | |
---|---|
Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
Defendant: The Boeing Company | |
Represented By: | Gregg M. Lemley |
Represented By: | Andrew L. Metcalf |
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 ] |
Plaintiff: Jeff Bonomo | |
Represented By: | Douglas B. Ponder |
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.