Alywahby v. Principi
| Anthony J. Principi |
| Esq. Rosalind Gordon |
| 1:2001cv06512 |
| February 5, 2010 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of New York |
| Brooklyn Office |
| Lois Bloom |
| Nicholas G. Garaufis |
| Civil Rights: Jobs |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 2000 Job Discrimination (Race) |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
102
ORDER: On December 3, 2010, the court ordered Plaintiff, proceeding pro se, to show cause within thirty days why the three above-captioned cases should not be dismissed for failure to prosecute. (01-CV-6512, Docket Entry # 101; 01-CV-8017, Docket Ent ry # 88; 04-CV-2183, Docket Entry # 70.) Plaintiff has not responded to that order; her time for doing so has now expired. Consequently, Plaintiff's cases are dismissed under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b) for failure to prosecute. The Cl erk of Court is directed to enter judgment accordingly. The court certifies pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal from this order would not be taken in good faith and therefore in forma pauperis status is denied for the purpo se of any appeal. See Coppedge v. United States, 369 U.S. 438, 444-45 (1962). Ordered by Judge Nicholas G. Garaufis on 1/6/2011. (c/m to pro se plaintiff; fwd'd for jgm) Associated Cases: 1:01-cv-06512-NGG-LB, 1:01-cv-08017-NGG-LB, 1:04-cv-02183-NGG-LB (Lee, Tiffeny)
|
|
Filing
94
ORDER: By 93 Order dated 1/29/2010, the Hon. Nicholas G. Garaufis referred plaintiff's requests for further discovery and to add individuals to her witness list to me for determination. Discovery closed on 12/31/2002 in plaintiff's 01-cv- 6512 and 01-cv-8017 cases and on 1/3/2005 in case 04-cv-2183. The Court has held numerous pretrial conferences and is satisfied that plaintiff had the opportunity to raise her discovery issues. Therefore, to the extent plaintiff's 1/17/2010 filing is construed as a 92 request to reopen discovery, that request is denied. SO ORDERED.(Ordered by Magistrate Judge Lois Bloom, on 2/5/2010) C/mailed. (Latka-Mucha, Wieslawa)
|
|
Filing
89
MEMORANDUM & ORDER granting in part and denying in part (33) Motion for Partial Summary Judgment in case 1:04-cv-02183-NGG-LB; granting in part and denying in part (63) Motion for Partial Summary Judgment in case 1:01-cv-06512-NGG-LB; granting in par t and denying in part (52) Motion for Partial Summary Judgment in case 1:01-cv-08017-NGG-LB. The remaining claims are as follows: 1. Alywahby was reassigned in January 1997 in retaliation for prior EEOC activity to an assignment involving increased and new areas of proficiency, but less staff support and less favorable working conditions. 2. Alywahby was reassigned in February 1998 in retaliation for prior EEOC activity to an assignment involving increased and new areas of proficiency, but le ss staff support and less favorable working conditions. 3. Alywahby was formally reprimanded in June 2003 in retaliation for prior EEOC activity. 4 Alywahby was denied clinical privileges in 2003 in retaliation for prior EEOC activity and on accou nt of her race. 5. Alywahby was removed from her position as a nurse practitioner in retaliation for her prior EEOC activity and on account of her race. The parties are directed to confer and to submit a letter to the court on the readiness of this case for trial no later than January 20, 2010. Ordered by Judge Nicholas G. Garaufis on 12/24/2009. (c/m to pro se) Associated Cases: 1:01-cv-06512-NGG-LB, 1:01-cv-08017-NGG-LB, 1:04-cv-02183-NGG-LB (Lee, Tiffeny)
|
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 York Eastern 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.
