Saravia v. Royal Guard Fence Co., Inc. et al
| Carlos Saravia |
| Royal Guard Fence Co., Inc., Ralph Guercia, Brenda Stollings and Gin-Skye Construction Inc. |
| 2:2019cv02086 |
| April 10, 2019 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of New York |
| Denis R Hurley |
| Steven I Locke |
| Labor: Fair Standards |
| 29 U.S.C. ยง 201 Denial of Overtime Compensation |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on September 2, 2020. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 11 Proposed Scheduling Order by Ralph Guercia, Royal Guard Fence Co., Inc. (Ziskin, Richard) |
| Filing 10 NOTICE of Appearance by Suzanne Harmon Ziskin on behalf of Ralph Guercia, Royal Guard Fence Co., Inc. (aty to be noticed) (Ziskin, Suzanne) |
| Filing 9 SUMMONS Returned Executed by Carlos Saravia. Ralph Guercia served on 4/16/2019, answer due 5/7/2019; Brenda Stollings served on 4/12/2019, answer due 5/3/2019. (Hassan, Abdul) |
| Filing 8 ANSWER to #1 Complaint, by Gin-Skye Construction Inc., Brenda Stollings. (Pallaci, Vincent) |
Filing 7
INITIAL CONFERENCE ORDER: An Initial Conference is set for 7/11/2019 at 10:30 AM in Courtroom 820 before Magistrate Judge Steven I. Locke. Ordered by Magistrate Judge Steven I. Locke on 5/8/2019. (Attachments: #1 SIL Individual Rules, #2 Scheduling Order Worksheet) (Gandiosi, Kristin)
|
| Filing 6 ANSWER to #1 Complaint, by Ralph Guercia, Royal Guard Fence Co., Inc.. (Ziskin, Richard) |
| Filing 5 SUMMONS Returned Executed by Carlos Saravia. Gin-Skye Construction Inc. served on 4/12/2019, answer due 5/3/2019; Royal Guard Fence Co., Inc. served on 4/12/2019, answer due 5/3/2019. (Hassan, Abdul) |
| Filing 4 NOTICE of Appearance by Richard B. Ziskin on behalf of Ralph Guercia, Royal Guard Fence Co., Inc. (aty to be noticed) (Ziskin, Richard) |
| Filing 3 Summons Issued as to All Defendants. (Rodin, Deanna) |
| Filing 2 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. (Rodin, Deanna) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT against Gin-Skye Construction Inc., Ralph Guercia, Royal Guard Fence Co., Inc., Brenda Stollings filing fee $ 400, receipt number ANYEDC-11371491 Was the Disclosure Statement on Civil Cover Sheet completed -YES,, filed by Carlos Saravia. (Attachments: #1 Proposed Summons, #2 Civil Cover Sheet) (Hassan, Abdul) |
| This attorney case opening filing has been checked for quality control. (Rodin, Deanna) |
| Case Assigned to Judge Denis R. Hurley and Magistrate Judge Steven I. Locke. 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. (Rodin, Deanna) |
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 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.
