Union Pacific Railroad Company v. Railroad Retirement Board
Plaintiff: Union Pacific Railroad Company
Defendant: Railroad Retirement Board and U.S. Railroad Retirement Board
Case Number: 8:2024cv00051
Filed: February 9, 2024
Court: US District Court for the District of Nebraska
Presiding Judge: Susan M Bazis
Referring Judge: Brian C Buescher
Nature of Suit: Other Statutes: Administrative Procedures Act/Review or Appeal of Agency Decision
Cause of Action: 05 U.S.C. § 551 Administrative Procedure Act
Jury Demanded By: None
Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on April 2, 2024. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
April 2, 2024 Filing 28 NOTICE of Appearance by Attorney Lynnett M. Wagner on behalf of Defendant U.S. Railroad Retirement Board (Wagner, Lynnett)
April 2, 2024 Filing 27 NOTICE of Appearance by Attorney Danielle L. Rowley on behalf of Defendant U.S. Railroad Retirement Board (Rowley, Danielle)
March 29, 2024 Opinion or Order Filing 26 TEXT ORDER granting #24 Unopposed Motion to Holding Motion for Preliminary Injunction in Abeyance. The Motion for Preliminary Injunction #2 will be held in abeyance until thirty days after Defendant serves notice to the Court and Plaintiff that a new Hearings Examiner has been appointed. Ordered by Magistrate Judge Susan M. Bazis. (LRH)
March 29, 2024 Opinion or Order Filing 25 TEXT ORDER approving #23 Stipulation. The parties shall govern themselves in accordance with their Stipulation. Defendant shall respond to the Amended Complaint by May 17, 2024. Ordered by Magistrate Judge Susan M. Bazis. (LRH)
March 28, 2024 Filing 24 UNOPPOSED MOTION to Hold Its Motion for Preliminary Injunction in Abeyance by Attorney Scott P. Moore on behalf of Plaintiff Union Pacific Railroad Company.(Moore, Scott)
March 28, 2024 Filing 23 JOINT STIPULATION by Attorney Scott P. Moore on behalf of Plaintiff Union Pacific Railroad Company.(Moore, Scott)
March 28, 2024 Filing 22 AMENDED COMPLAINT against Defendant U.S. Railroad Retirement Board, by Attorney Scott P. Moore on behalf of Union Pacific Railroad Company (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A - April Order from RRB)(Moore, Scott)
March 12, 2024 Filing 21 SUMMONS Returned Executed upon The Honorable Merrick Garland, Attorney General of the United States, defendant U.S. Railroad Retirement Board on 2/29/2024. (Attachments: #1 Proof of Delivery - Certified Mail)(Murphy, Spencer)
March 5, 2024 Filing 20 SUMMONS Returned Executed upon Susan T. Lehr, U.S. Attorney for the District of Nebraska, defendant U.S. Railroad Retirement Board on 2/26/2024. (Attachments: #1 Supplement Proof of Delivery - Certified Mail)(Murphy, Spencer)
February 22, 2024 Filing 19 TEXT ORDER granting Motion for Admission Pro Hac Vice #18 for attorney Daniel W. Wolff. Ordered by Deputy Clerk. (LKO)
February 22, 2024 Filing 18 FINAL MOTION for Admission Pro Hac Vice Filing fee $ 100, receipt number ANEDC-5035160 by Attorney Daniel W. Wolff on behalf of Plaintiff Union Pacific Railroad Company.(Wolff, Daniel)
February 22, 2024 Filing 17 Summons Issued as to defendant U.S. Railroad Retirement Board, U.S. Attorney's Office, and U.S. Attorney General. YOU MUST PRINT YOUR ISSUED SUMMONS, WHICH ARE ATTACHED TO THIS DOCUMENT. PAPER COPIES WILL NOT BE MAILED. (JES)
February 22, 2024 Filing 16 TEXT ORDER granting Motion for Admission Pro Hac Vice #14 for attorney Henry W. Leung. Ordered by Deputy Clerk. (LKO)
February 22, 2024 Filing 15 TEXT ORDER granting Motion for Admission Pro Hac Vice #12 for attorney Thomas P. Gies. Ordered by Deputy Clerk. (LKO)
February 21, 2024 Filing 14 MOTION for Admission Pro Hac Vice Henry W. Leung Filing fee $ 100, receipt number ANEDC-5034755 by Attorney Henry W. Leung on behalf of Plaintiff Union Pacific Railroad Company.(Leung, Henry)
February 21, 2024 Filing 13 Summons Requested as to regarding Index,,,, #4 , Brief #3 , Complaint #1 , Motion for Preliminary Injunction #2 . (Murphy, Spencer)
February 21, 2024 Filing 12 MOTION for Admission Pro Hac Vice Thomas P. Gies Filing fee $ 100, receipt number ANEDC-5034559 by Attorney Thomas P. Gies on behalf of Plaintiff Union Pacific Railroad Company.(Gies, Thomas)
February 13, 2024 Filing 11 CORPORATE DISCLOSURE STATEMENT pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 7.1 identifying Corporate Parent Union Pacific Corporation for Union Pacific Railroad Company. by Attorney Scott P. Moore on behalf of Plaintiffs Union Pacific Railroad Company, Union Pacific Corporation.(Moore, Scott)
February 12, 2024 Filing 10 TEXT ORDER that filing fee in the amount of $405.00 is refunded to the payor, Christopher Hedican, receipt number ANEDC-5028498 because the filing fee is a duplicate. Ordered by Deputy Clerk. (DKM)
February 12, 2024 Filing 9 ATTORNEY LETTER by Clerk that Attorney Thomas P. Gies has not registered for admittance to practice nor registered for the system. If the requested action is not taken within fifteen (15) days of the date of this letter, this matter will be referred to the assigned magistrate judge for the entry of a show cause order. (LRM)
February 12, 2024 Filing 8 ATTORNEY LETTER by Clerk that Attorney Henry W. Leung has not registered for admittance to practice nor registered for the system. If the requested action is not taken within fifteen (15) days of the date of this letter, this matter will be referred to the assigned magistrate judge for the entry of a show cause order. (LRM)
February 12, 2024 Filing 7 ATTORNEY LETTER by Clerk that Attorney Daniel W. Wolff has not registered for admittance to practice nor registered for the system. If the requested action is not taken within fifteen (15) days of the date of this letter, this matter will be referred to the assigned magistrate judge for the entry of a show cause order. (LRM)
February 12, 2024 Filing 6 TEXT NOTICE REGARDING CORPORATE DISCLOSURE STATEMENT by Deputy Clerk as to Plaintiff Union Pacific Railroad Company. Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 7.1, non-governmental corporate parties are required to file Corporate Disclosure Statements (Statements). The parties shall use the form Corporate Disclosure Statement, available on the Web site of the court at http://www.ned.uscourts.gov/forms/. If you have not filed your Statement, you must do so within 15 days of the date of this notice. If you have already filed your Statement in this case, you are reminded to file a Supplemental Statement within a reasonable time of any change in the information that the statement requires.(LRM)
February 12, 2024 Filing 5 TEXT NOTICE OF JUDGES ASSIGNED: Judge Brian C. Buescher and Magistrate Judge Susan M. Bazis assigned. In accordance with 28 U.S.C. 636(c)(2), the parties are notified that, if all parties consent, a magistrate judge may conduct a civil action or proceeding, including a jury or nonjury trial, subject to the courts rules and policies governing the assignment of judges in civil cases. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 73; NEGenR 1.4. (LRM)
February 9, 2024 Filing 4 INDEX in support of MOTION for Preliminary Injunction #2 by Attorney Scott P. Moore on behalf of Plaintiff Union Pacific Railroad Company. (Attachments: #1 Affidavit Affidavit of Declaration for Thomas P. Gies, #2 Affidavit Affidavit of Declaration for Maqui Parkerson, #3 Exhibit 1 - OGC Investigation Letter, #4 Exhibit 2 - Dadabo Letter of August 3, 2021 (quoting UP letter), #5 Exhibit 3 - 023 re Document Release, #6 Exhibit 4 - Dabado Email to Gies of August 16, 2023, #7 Exhibit 5 - Debado Email to Gies from September 12, 2023, #8 Exhibit 6 - Dabdo Email to Gies from October 16, 2023, #9 Exhibit 7 - FOIA Production of Emails from BMWED to Board, #10 Exhibit 8 - FOIA Production of Letter from BMWED to Board, #11 Exhibit 9 - FOIA Production of Letter from Dabado to RailPros Counsel, #12 Exhibit 10 - Dabado Email to Gies from January 31, 2024, #13 Exhibit 11 - Email of Jan. 31, 2024, confirming substance of discussion on Jan. 30)(Moore, Scott)
February 9, 2024 Filing 3 BRIEF in support of MOTION for Preliminary Injunction #2 by Attorney Scott P. Moore on behalf of Plaintiff Union Pacific Railroad Company.(Moore, Scott)
February 9, 2024 Filing 2 MOTION for Preliminary Injunction by Attorney Scott P. Moore on behalf of Plaintiff Union Pacific Railroad Company.(Moore, Scott)
February 9, 2024 Filing 1 COMPLAINT against Railroad Retirement Board ( Filing fee $ 405, receipt number BNEDC-5028498), by Attorney Scott P. Moore on behalf of Union Pacific Railroad Company (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A - April Order)(Moore, Scott)

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 Nebraska District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Union Pacific Railroad Company v. Railroad Retirement Board
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Union Pacific Railroad Company
Represented By: Scott P. Moore
Represented By: Thomas P. Gies
Represented By: Daniel W. Wolff
Represented By: Henry W. Leung
Represented By: Spencer R. Murphy
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: Railroad Retirement Board
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: U.S. Railroad Retirement Board
Represented By: Danielle L. Rowley
Represented By: Lynnett M. Wagner
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?