Conley v. Premium Retail Services, Inc.
Plaintiff: Jonathan Conley
Defendant: Premium Retail Services, Inc.
Case Number: 1:2022cv03794
Filed: June 28, 2022
Court: US District Court for the Eastern District of New York
Presiding Judge: Brian M Cogan
Nature of Suit: Labor: Other
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 1332 Diversity-(Citizenship)
Jury Demanded By: Plaintiff
Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on July 18, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
July 18, 2022 Filing 6 NOTICE of Voluntary Dismissal by Jonathan Conley (Gangat, Mohammed)
July 18, 2022 Opinion or Order Civil Case Terminated as per plaintiff's Rule 41(a) notice. Ordered by Judge Brian M. Cogan on 7/18/2022. (Cogan, Brian)
June 28, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 5 SCHEDULING ORDER: A telephonic Initial Status Conference is set for 8/8/2022 at 5:00 pm. Parties will use the toll-free number 888-684-8852 followed by access code 6427877#. When the conference begins parties will be prompted to input the security code 3794#. See attached mandatory requirements for the conference. Ordered by Judge Brian M. Cogan on 6/28/2022. (Weisberg, Peggy)
June 28, 2022 Filing 4 This attorney case opening filing has been checked for quality control. See the attachment for corrections that were made, if any. (Bowens, Priscilla)
June 28, 2022 Filing 3 In accordance with Rule 73 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and Local Rule 73.1, the parties are notified that if all parties consent a United States magistrate judge of this court is available to conduct all proceedings in this civil action including a (jury or nonjury) trial and to order the entry of a final judgment. Attached to the Notice is a blank copy of the consent form that should be filled out, signed and filed electronically only if all parties wish to consent. The form may also be accessed at the following link: #http://www.uscourts.gov/uscourts/FormsAndFees/Forms/AO085.pdf. You may withhold your consent without adverse substantive consequences. Do NOT return or file the consent unless all parties have signed the consent. (Bowens, Priscilla)
June 28, 2022 Filing 2 Summons Issued as to Premium Retail Services, Inc.. (Bowens, Priscilla)
June 28, 2022 Filing 1 COMPLAINT against Premium Retail Services, Inc. filing fee $ 402, receipt number ANYEDC-15699030 Was the Disclosure Statement on Civil Cover Sheet completed -NO,, filed by Jonathan Conley. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet, #2 Proposed Summons) (Gangat, Mohammed)
June 28, 2022 Case Assigned to Judge Brian M. Cogan. Please download and review the Individual Practices of the assigned Judges, located on our #website. Attorneys are responsible for providing courtesy copies to judges where their Individual Practices require such. (Bowens, Priscilla)

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 York Eastern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Conley v. Premium Retail Services, Inc.
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Jonathan Conley
Represented By: Mohammed Gangat
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: Premium Retail Services, Inc.
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?