BROWN v. ISSM PROTECTIVE SERVICES,INC. et al
| LYNN BROWN |
| ISSM PROTECTIVE SERVICES,INC., ABC CORPORATIONS 1-10 (FICTITIOUS NAMES DESCRIBING PRESENTLY UNIDENTIFIED BUSINESS ENTITIES), DEF PARTNERSHIPS 1-10, GHI LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANIES 1-10, JOHN/JANE DOES 1-10 (fictitious names for unknown people) and JOHN DOES INDIVIDUALS 1-100 |
| 2:2022cv02457 |
| April 28, 2022 |
| US District Court for the District of New Jersey |
| Jessica S Allen |
| John Michael Vazquez |
| Labor: Family and Medical Leave Act |
| 29 U.S.C. ยง 2601 Family Medical Leave Act |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on April 28, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 2 SUMMONS ISSUED as to ISSM PROTECTIVE SERVICES,INC.. Attached is the official court Summons, please fill out Defendant and Plaintiffs attorney information and serve. (ld, ) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT against ABC CORPORATIONS 1-10 (FICTITIOUS NAMES DESCRIBING PRESENTLY UNIDENTIFIED BUSINESS ENTITIES), DEF PARTNERSHIPS 1-10, GHI LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANIES 1-10, ISSM PROTECTIVE SERVICES,INC., JOHN DOES INDIVIDUALS 1-100, JOHN/JANE DOES 1-10 (fictitious names for unknown people) ( Filing and Admin fee $ 402 receipt number ANJDC-13370755) with JURY DEMAND, filed by LYNN BROWN.(SHEFFET, ETHAN) |
| Case Assigned to Judge John Michael Vazquez and Magistrate Judge Jessica S. Allen. (ak, ) |
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 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.
