Melendez v. City of Las Cruces Police Department et al
Plaintiff: Joel A. Melendez
Defendant: City of Las Cruces Police Department and D'Anthany Roohr
Case Number: 2:2021cv00061
Filed: January 25, 2021
Court: US District Court for the District of New Mexico
Presiding Judge: Robert C Brack
Referring Judge: Carmen E Garza
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights: Other
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 1441
Jury Demanded By: Defendant
Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on August 31, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
March 25, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 8 ORDER Resetting #6 Telephonic Rule 16 Scheduling Conference. The Telephonic Rule 16 Scheduling Conference previously set for 4/21/21, at 01:30 PM is RESET for 4/19/21 at 01:30 PM before Chief Magistrate Judge Carmen E. Garza. [The parties shall call Judge Garza's AT&T Teleconference line at (877) 810-9415, follow the prompts, and enter the Access Code 7467959, to be connected to the proceedings.] (crc)
March 25, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 7 PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that this case has been reassigned to United States Sr. District Judge Robert C. Brack as the trial judge. Under D.N.M.LR-Civ. 10.1, the first page of each document must have the case file number and initials of the assigned judges.Accordingly, further documents filed in this matter must bear the case number and the judges' initials shown in the case caption and the NEF for this document. Kindly reflect this change in your filings. United States Magistrate Judge Kevin R. Sweazea no longer assigned to this case.[THIS IS A TEXT-ONLY ENTRY. THERE ARE NO DOCUMENTS ATTACHED.] (arp)
March 1, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 6 INITIAL SCHEDULING ORDER by Chief Magistrate Judge Carmen E. Garza. Joint Status Report is due by 4/14/21. A Telephonic Rule 16 Scheduling Conference is set for 4/21/21 at 1:30 PM before Chief Magistrate Judge Carmen E. Garza. [Parties shall call Judge Garza's AT&T Teleconference line at (877) 810-9415, follow the prompts, and enter access code 7467959, to be connected to the proceedings.] Unless otherwise notified by the Clerk or the Court a notice of consent or non-consent for this case to proceed before the trial Magistrate Judge should be submitted by each party no later than 3/22/21. (crc)
February 28, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 5 ANSWER to Complaint (Notice of Removal) Defendants' Answer to Civil Complaint by City of Las Cruces Police Department, D'Anthany Roohr. (Robles, Luis)
February 18, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 4 NOTICE by City of Las Cruces Police Department, D'Anthany Roohr Notice of Filing State Court Record (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A) (Robles, Luis)
January 26, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 3 PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that this case has been randomly assigned to United States Magistrate Judge Kevin R. Sweazea 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)
January 26, 2021 Opinion or Order United States Magistrate Judge Kevin R. Sweazea and United States Magistrate Judge Carmen E. Garza assigned. (jg)
January 25, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 2 NOTICE of Appearance by Luis E. Robles on behalf of City of Las Cruces Police Department, D'Anthany Roohr (Robles, Luis)
January 25, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 1 NOTICE OF REMOVAL by D'Anthany Roohr, City of Las Cruces Police Department Notice of Removal from Third Judicial District Court, case number D-307-CV-2020-02571. ( Filing Fee - Online Payment), filed by D'Anthany Roohr, City of Las Cruces Police Department. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A, #2 Civil Cover Sheet)(Robles, Luis)
January 25, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing and Administrative Fees Received: $ 402 receipt number CNMDC-7511253 re #1 Notice of Removal, filed by D'Anthany Roohr, City of Las Cruces Police Department (Payment made via Pay.gov)(Robles, Luis)

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 this case: Melendez v. City of Las Cruces Police Department 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: City of Las Cruces Police Department
Represented By: Luis E. Robles
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: D'Anthany Roohr
Represented By: Luis E. Robles
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: Joel A. Melendez
Represented By: G Greg Valdez
Represented By: Jose R. Coronado
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?