Guevara v. Walmart Inc., et al.
| Midaisy Calle Ladron De Guevara |
| Walmart Inc., Stacy Mitchell and Walmart Inc. doing business as Walmart Supercenter #4557 |
| 2:2020cv00913 |
| May 20, 2020 |
| US District Court for the District of Nevada |
| Daniel J Albregts |
| James C Mahan |
| P.I.: Other |
| 28 U.S.C. § 1332 |
| Defendant |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on September 14, 2020. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 19 NOTICE PURSUANT TO LOCAL RULE IB 2-2: In accordance with 28 USC 636(c) and FRCP 73, the parties in this action are provided with a link to the "AO 85 Notice of Availability, Consent, and Order of Reference - Exercise of Jurisdiction by a U.S. Magistrate Judge" form on the Court's website - #www.nvd.uscourts.gov. AO 85 Consent forms should NOT be electronically filed. Upon consent of all parties, counsel are advised to manually file the form with the Clerk's Office. (A copy of form AO 85 has been mailed to parties not receiving electronic service.) (HAM) |
Filing 18
SCHEDULING ORDER granting #17 Joint Discovery Plan and Scheduling Order. Discovery due by 12/16/2020. Motions due by 1/15/2021. Proposed Joint Pretrial Order due by 2/14/2021. **NOTE - The Local Rules as amended on 4/17/2020 eliminated former Local Rule 26-3's requirement for Interim Status Reports. Therefore, the parties are not required to submit an Interim Status Report. The parties are directed to review the revised local rules for further changes.** Signed by Magistrate Judge Daniel J. Albregts on 7/16/2020. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - HAM)
|
| Filing 17 Proposed Discovery Plan and Scheduling Order re 16 Minute Order, by Plaintiff Midaisy Calle Ladron De Guevara. (Simonsen, Evan) |
| Filing 16 MINUTE ORDER IN CHAMBERS of the Honorable Magistrate Judge Daniel J. Albregts on 7/7/2020. ORDER denying #14 Discovery Plan and Scheduling Order. IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the parties' Proposed Joint Discovery Plan and Scheduling Order is DENIED without prejudice due to its failure to correctly cite to and comply with the amended Local Rules. The Local Rules of Practice for the District of Nevada were amended and adopted on April 17, 2020. The parties are directed to review the amendments to the Local Rules, specifically Local Rules 26-1 through 26-7, and re-file a compliant plan. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the parties must submit an amended proposed discovery plan and scheduling order by July 14, 2020. (no image attached) (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - KL) |
| Filing 15 REPLY to Response to #5 Motion to Dismiss by Defendants Stacy Mitchell, Walmart Inc.. (Robinson, Latisha) |
| Filing 14 Proposed Stipulated Discovery Plan and Scheduling Order by Defendants Stacy Mitchell, Walmart Inc.. (Robinson, Latisha) |
| Filing 13 CERTIFICATE of Interested Parties by Midaisy Calle Ladron De Guevara. There are no known interested parties other than those participating in the case (Simonsen, Evan) |
| Filing 12 REPLY to #10 Response to #8 Motion to Remand, by Plaintiff Midaisy Calle Ladron De Guevara. (Simonsen, Evan) |
| Filing 11 RESPONSE to #5 Motion to Dismiss by Plaintiff Midaisy Calle Ladron De Guevara. Replies due by 7/7/2020. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit Plaintiff's Complaint) (Simonsen, Evan) |
| Filing 10 RESPONSE to #8 Motion to Remand to State Court by Defendants Stacy Mitchell, Walmart Inc.. Replies due by 7/1/2020. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A, #2 Exhibit B, #3 Exhibit C) (Robinson, Latisha) |
| Filing 9 Joint Status Report Regarding Removal by Defendant Walmart Inc. (Robinson, Latisha) |
| Filing 8 MOTION to Remand to State Court by Plaintiff Midaisy Calle Ladron De Guevara. Responses due by 6/24/2020. (Simonsen, Evan) |
| Filing 7 CLERK'S NOTICE Regarding Local Rule IC 5-1(b). ECF No. #6 was not filed pursuant to LR IC 5-1(b) by attorneys Evan K. Simonsen and Ryan Anderson. Please note the signatory must be the attorney or pro se party who electronically files the document. No further action is required concerning this document at this time. (no image attached) (SLD) |
| Filing 6 MOTION to Remand to State Court by Plaintiff Midaisy Calle Ladron De Guevara. Responses due by 6/19/2020. (Anderson, Ryan) |
| Filing 5 MOTION to Dismiss by Defendants Stacy Mitchell, Walmart Inc.. Responses due by 6/19/2020. (Attachments: #1 Index, #2 Exhibit A, #3 Exhibit B) (Robinson, Latisha) |
| Filing 4 STATEMENT REGARDING REMOVAL by Defendants Stacy Mitchell, Walmart Inc.. (Robinson, Latisha) |
| Filing 3 CERTIFICATE of Interested Parties by Stacy Mitchell, Walmart Inc.. There are no known interested parties other than those participating in the case (Robinson, Latisha) |
| Filing 2 MINUTE ORDER IN CHAMBERS of the Honorable Judge James C. Mahan on 5/21/2020. Statement regarding removed action is due by 6/5/2020. Joint Status Report regarding removed action is due by 6/20/2020. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - ADR) |
| Case randomly assigned to Judge James C. Mahan and Magistrate Judge Daniel J. Albregts. (ADR) |
| Filing 1 PETITION FOR REMOVAL from Clark County Eighth Judicial Court, Case Number A-20-809590-C, (Filing fee $ 400 receipt number 0978-6013110) by Walmart Inc.. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet, #2 Exhibit A, #3 Exhibit B, #4 Exhibit C) (Robinson, Latisha) NOTICE of Certificate of Interested Parties requirement: Under Local Rule 7.1-1, a party must immediately file its disclosure statement with its first appearance, pleading, petition, motion, response, or other request addressed to the court. |
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 Nevada 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.
