Jones v. L3 Harris et al
Plaintiff: Tedric K. Jones
Defendant: L3 Harris and City of Rochester
Case Number: 6:2024cv06127
Filed: February 26, 2024
Court: US District Court for the Western District of New York
Presiding Judge: Elizabeth A Wolford
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights: Other
Cause of Action: 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 Civil Rights Act
Jury Demanded By: Plaintiff
Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on April 18, 2024. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
February 26, 2024 Opinion or Order Filing 3 MOTION to Appoint Counsel by Tedric K. Jones. (DMK)
February 26, 2024 Opinion or Order Filing 2 MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis by Tedric K. Jones. (DMK)
February 26, 2024 Opinion or Order Filing 1 COMPLAINT against City of Rochester, L3 Harris, filed by Tedric K. Jones. (DMK)
February 26, 2024 Opinion or Order 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. Pro Se packet consisting of Privacy Notice, Consent to Proceed Before a Magistrate Judge, Civil Case Timeline, ADR Notification and pro se assistance program info given to plaintiff at the counter. (DMK)
February 26, 2024 Opinion or Order AUTOMATIC REFERRAL TO MEDIATION Pursuant to Section 2.1(A) of the Plan for Alternative Dispute Resolution in the United States District Court for the Western District of New York (the ADR Plan), this case is automatically referred to ADR. To access the ADR Plan and for inquiries regarding the Court's ADR Program please review the Court's #ADR webpage and/or contact the Court's ADR Administrator at #adrprogram@nywd.uscourts.gov.' Prior to the Local Rule 16 scheduling conference, counsel and unrepresented parties shall review the #ADR Plan and confer with each other regarding ADR for this case. Unless the parties agree to a different intervention, it is presumed they will participate in mediation. The parties shall be prepared to report on the outcome of their ADR discussion at the scheduling conference, as the initial Scheduling Order for this case will establish ADR deadlines in accordance with the ADR Plan. Pro Se packet consisting of Privacy Notice, Consent to Proceed Before a Magistrate Judge, Civil Case Timeline, ADR Notification and pro se assistance program info given to plaintiff at the counter. (DMK)

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 this case: Jones v. L3 Harris et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Tedric K. Jones
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: L3 Harris
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: City of Rochester
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?