Paulk v. Social Security Administration et al
| Nicole M. Paulk |
| Social Security Administration, Roberto Rojas and David R. Acevedo |
| 1:2024cv00063 |
| January 16, 2024 |
| US District Court for the Western District of New York |
| John L Sinatra |
| Civil Rights: Jobs |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 Civil Rights (Employment Discrimination) |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on January 17, 2024. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 2 Summons Issued as to David R. Acevedo, Roberto Rojas, Social Security Administration. (TMK) |
| Notice of Availability of Magistrate Judge: A United States Magistrate of this Court is available to conduct all proceedings in this civil action in accordance with 28 U.S.C. 636c and FRCP 73. The Notice, Consent, and Reference of a Civil Action to a Magistrate Judge form (AO-85) is available for download at #http://www.uscourts.gov/services-forms/forms. (TMK) |
| AUTOMATIC REFERRAL to Mediation: the ADR Plan is available for download at #http://www.nywd.uscourts.gov/alternative-dispute-resolution.(TMK) |
| Case Assigned to Hon. John L. Sinatra, Jr. Notification to Chambers of on-line civil case opening. (TMK) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT AND JURY DEMAND against All Defendants $ 405 receipt number ANYWDC-5081460, filed by NICOLE M. PAULK. (Attachments: #1 Def Summons, #2 Civil Cover Sheet)(Korn, Lindy) |
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 Western 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.
