Rhodes v. Regents of the University of New Mexico et al
| David Rhodes |
| Regents of the University of New Mexico, Garnett S. Stokes and Mitzi M Montoya |
| 1:2021cv01128 |
| November 24, 2021 |
| US District Court for the District of New Mexico |
| Kirtan Khalsa |
| Stephan M Vidmar |
| Civil Rights: Other |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1441 |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on October 20, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 8
Clerk's Minutes for telephonic status conference held before Magistrate Judge Stephan M. Vidmar on January 3, 2022. (Recording Info: MARS) (nlb)
|
|
Filing 7
ORDER by Magistrate Judge Stephan M. Vidmar RESETTING a telephonic status conference. The Status Conference set for December 20, 2021 is VACATED and RESET for January 3, 2022, at 1:30 p.m. MST. Counsel must call Judge Vidmar's AT&T Conference Line at (888) 363-4734 (access code: 4382538) to connect to the proceedings. [THIS IS A TEXT-ONLY ENTRY. NO DOCUMENTS ARE ATTACHED.] (nlb)
|
|
Filing 6
DEFENDANTS' AMENDED ANSWER to Complaint (Notice of Removal) FOR VIOLATION OF DUE PROCESS AND CONTRACTUAL RIGHTS by Mitzi M Montoya, Regents of the University of New Mexico, Garnett S. Stokes. (Black, Kathy)
|
|
Filing 5
ORDER by Magistrate Judge Stephan M. Vidmar SETTING telephonic Status Conference for December 20, 2021, at 9:30 a.m. MST. Counsel must call Judge Vidmar's AT&T Conference Line at (888) 363-4734 (access code: 4382538) to connect to the proceedings. (nlb)
|
|
Filing 4
DEFENDANTS' ANSWER to Complaint (Notice of Removal) FOR VIOLATION OF DUE PROCESS AND CONTRACTUAL RIGHTS by Mitzi M Montoya, Regents of the University of New Mexico, Garnett S. Stokes. (Black, Kathy)
|
|
Filing and Administrative Fees Received: $ 402 receipt number ANMDC-8008869 re #1 Notice of Removal, filed by Regents of the University of New Mexico, Garnett S. Stokes, Mitzi M Montoya (Payment made via Pay.gov)(Hazlett, Christa)
|
|
Filing 3
PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that this case has been randomly assigned to United States Magistrate Judge Kirtan Khalsa to conduct dispositive proceedings in this matter, including motions and trial. Appeal from a judgment entered by a Magistrate Judge will be to the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit. It is the responsibility of the case filer to serve a copy of this Notice upon all parties with the summons and complaint. Consent is strictly voluntary, and a party is free to withhold consent without adverse consequences. Should a party choose to consent, notice should be made no later than 21 days after entry of the Order setting the Rule 16 Initial Scheduling Conference. For e-filers, visit our Web site at www.nmd.uscourts.gov for more information and instructions.[THIS IS A TEXT-ONLY ENTRY. THERE ARE NO DOCUMENTS ATTACHED.] (jg)
|
|
Filing 2
APPENDIX/SUPPLEMENT Civil Cover Sheet by Mitzi M Montoya, Regents of the University of New Mexico, Garnett S. Stokes (Hazlett, Christa)
|
|
Filing 1
NOTICE OF REMOVAL by Mitzi M Montoya, Garnett S. Stokes, Regents of the University of New Mexico from Second Judicial District Court, case number D-202-CV-2021-05952. ( Filing Fee - Online Payment), filed by Mitzi M Montoya, Garnett S. Stokes, Regents of the University of New Mexico. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A)(Hazlett, Christa)
|
|
United States Magistrate Judge Kirtan Khalsa and United States Magistrate Judge Stephan M. Vidmar assigned. (jg)
|
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 Mexico 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.
