FULTON v. ETEAM, INC. et al
Plaintiff: Gale Fulton
Defendant: ETEAM, INC. and Employer Known to E-team
Case Number: 2:2019cv21898
Filed: December 23, 2019
Court: US District Court for the District of New Jersey
Presiding Judge: Madeline Cox Arleo
Referring Judge: Michael A Hammer
2 Judge: Edward S Kiel
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights: Jobs
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 1331
Jury Demanded By: Plaintiff
Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on February 6, 2020. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
February 6, 2020 Clerk`s Text Order - The document #5 Application for Clerk's Order to Ext Answer/Proposed Order submitted by ETEAM, INC. has been GRANTED. The answer due date has been set for 3/4/2020. (qa, )
February 4, 2020 Filing 5 Application and Proposed Order for Clerk's Order to extend time to answer as to E-Team Inc.. (COSTA, CLAUDIA)
February 4, 2020 Filing 4 NOTICE of Appearance by CLAUDIA A. COSTA on behalf of ETEAM, INC. (COSTA, CLAUDIA)
February 3, 2020 Filing 3 AFFIDAVIT of Service for Summons served on ETEAM, Inc. on 1/29/2020, filed by GALE FULTON., SUMMONS Returned Executed by GALE FULTON. ETEAM, INC. served on 1/29/2020, answer due 2/19/2020. (DINNOCENZO, ERIC)
January 28, 2020 Magistrate Judge Edward S. Kiel added. Magistrate Judge Michael A. Hammer no longer assigned to case. (ps, )
December 27, 2019 Filing 2 SUMMONS ISSUED as to ETEAM, INC.. Attached is the official court Summons, please fill out Defendant and Plaintiffs attorney information and serve. (qa, )
December 26, 2019 Filing fee: $ 400.00, receipt number TRE108437 (jjc, )
December 26, 2019 CLERK'S QUALITY CONTROL MESSAGE - The case you electronically filed has been processed, however, the following deficiencies were found: In the future when choosing parties please choose each party individually. Do NOT select the ALL PLAINTIFFS or ALL DEFENDANTS button. Party Information is to be entered in CAPITAL LETTERS. Please be advised, this complaint was filed without a filing fee. Please submit the fee of $400 to our office immediately. The Clerk's Office has made the appropriate changes. Please refer to the Attorney Case Opening Guide for processing electronically filed cases. (jjc, )
December 26, 2019 Judge Madeline Cox Arleo and Magistrate Judge Michael A. Hammer added. (ps, )
December 23, 2019 Filing 1 COMPLAINT against All Defendants (Filing and Admin fee $ 400) with JURY DEMAND, filed by Gale Fulton. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet)(DINNOCENZO, ERIC)

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 New Jersey District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: FULTON v. ETEAM, 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 ]
Defendant: ETEAM, INC.
Represented By: CLAUDIA A. COSTA
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: Employer Known to E-team
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: Gale Fulton
Represented By: ERIC DINNOCENZO
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?