Parker et al v. Tulsa Technology Center
| Joseph Parker, Yvette Hill and Lou Ella Seymore |
| Tulsa Technology Center, Tulsa Tech and Tulsa Tech.Edu |
| 4:2022cv00549 |
| December 16, 2022 |
| US District Court for the Northern District of Oklahoma |
| Claire V Eagan |
| Susan E Huntsman |
| Civil Rights: Other |
| 42 U.S.C. § 2000 e Job Discrimination (Employment) |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on November 1, 2023. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 24
RESPONSE in Opposition to Motion (Re: #12 MOTION to Dismiss Party Tulsa Technology Center ) by Lou Ella Seymore ; (lmt, Dpty Clk)
|
|
Filing 23
AFFIDAVIT of Lou Ella Seymore (Re: #7 Notice (Other) ) by Lou Ella Seymore (blc, Dpty Clk)
|
|
Filing 22
MAIL to Joseph Parker Returned - address has been changed to address unknown. (Re: #21 Order,,,,, Setting/Resetting Deadline(s)/Hearing(s),,,,,,,,,, Ruling on Motion for Extension of Time to Respond to Motion,,,,,,,,, ) (ll, Dpty Clk)
|
|
Filing 21
ORDER by Judge Claire V Eagan - Plaintiffs are proceeding pro se and they are advised that a pro se plaintiff may not represent another unrepresented party. Any joint response filed by plaintiffs must be signed by each plaintiff or plaintiffs must file separate responses on their own behalf. Plaintiffs' motions for extension of time to respond to defendant's motion to dismiss (Dkt. # 19, 20) is granted. Plaintiffs' responses to the motion to dismiss are due no later than February 13, 2023, and defendant's reply is due no later than February 27, 2023. ; setting/resetting deadline(s)/hearing(s): ( Responses due by 2/13/2023, Replies due by 2/27/2023); granting #19 Motion for Extension of Time to Respond to Motion; granting #20 Motion for Extension of Time to Respond to Motion (Re: #12 MOTION to Dismiss Party Tulsa Technology Center , #19 MOTION for Extension of Time to Respond to Motion , #20 MOTION for Extension of Time to Respond to Motion ) (RGG, Chambers)
|
|
Filing 20
MOTION for Extension of Time to Respond to Motion (Re: #12 MOTION to Dismiss Party Tulsa Technology Center ) by Yvette Hill, Joseph Parker (ll, Dpty Clk)
|
|
Filing 19
MOTION for Extension of Time to Respond to Motion (Re: #12 MOTION to Dismiss Party Tulsa Technology Center ) by Lou Ella Seymore (ll, Dpty Clk)
|
|
Filing 18
SUMMONS Returned Executed re: Tulsa Technology Center (Re: #1 Complaint ) (ll, Dpty Clk)
|
|
Filing 17
SUMMONS Returned Executed re: Tulsa Technology Center (Re: #1 Complaint ) (ll, Dpty Clk)
|
|
Filing 16
MINUTE ORDER by Court Clerk , directing Tulsa Technology Center to file a Disclosure Statement pursuant to FRCvP 7.1 and LCvR 7.1-1, if applicable. The parties shall use the form entitled Disclosure Statement available on the Courts website. (This entry is the Official Order of the Court. No document is attached.) (ll, Dpty Clk)
|
|
Filing 15
SUMMONS Issued by Court Clerk as to Tulsa Technology Center (lmt, Dpty Clk)
|
|
Filing 14
MINUTE ORDER by Judge Claire V Eagan - Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 16(b)(2), the Court finds good cause for delay in entering the scheduling order. If necessary, a scheduling order will be entered after ruling on the pending motion to dismiss (Dkt. # 12). (Re: #12 MOTION to Dismiss Party Tulsa Technology Center ) (This entry is the Official Order of the Court. No document is attached.) (RGG, Chambers)
|
|
Filing 13
ATTORNEY APPEARANCE by Adam Heavin on behalf of Tulsa Technology Center [Note: Attorney Adam Heavin added to party Tulsa Technology Center(pty:dft).] (Heavin, Adam)
|
|
Filing 12
MOTION to Dismiss Party Tulsa Technology Center by Tulsa Technology Center (With attachments) (Marshall, Samanthia)
|
|
Filing 11
ATTORNEY APPEARANCE by Samanthia Sierakowski Marshall on behalf of Tulsa Technology Center [Note: Attorney Samanthia Sierakowski Marshall added to party Tulsa Technology Center(pty:dft).] (Marshall, Samanthia)
|
|
Filing 10
DISCLOSURE STATEMENT by Yvette Hill (blc, Dpty Clk) (blc, Dpty Clk). Modified on 1/9/2023 to replace pdf to add missing page 4 (blc, Dpty Clk).
|
|
Filing 9
MAIL to Joseph Parker Returned - address has been changed to address unknown. (Re: 4 Minute Order,, Directing Party(ies) to File Disclosure Statement, ) (ll, Dpty Clk)
|
|
Filing 8
MINUTE ORDER by Court Clerk , directing Jeff C Baum to file a Disclosure Statement pursuant to FRCvP 7.1 and LCvR 7.1-1, if applicable. The parties shall use the form entitled Disclosure Statement available on the Courts website. (This entry is the Official Order of the Court. No document is attached.) (lmt, Dpty Clk)
|
|
Filing 7
NOTICE of Non-Service by Jeff C Baum [Note: Attorney Jeffrey Carter Baum added to party Jeff C Baum(pty:ip).] (Baum, Jeffrey)
|
|
Filing 6
DISCLOSURE STATEMENT by Lou Ella Seymore (sc, Dpty Clk)
|
|
Filing 5
SUMMONS Returned Executed re: Tulsa Technology Center (Re: #1 Complaint ) by Lou Ella Seymore (sc, Dpty Clk)
|
|
Filing 4
MINUTE ORDER by Court Clerk , directing Joseph Parker, Yvette Hill, Lou Ella Seymore to file a Disclosure Statement pursuant to FRCvP 7.1 and LCvR 7.1-1, if applicable. The parties shall use the form entitled Disclosure Statement available on the Courts website. (This entry is the Official Order of the Court. No document is attached.) (blc, Dpty Clk)
|
|
Filing 3
SUMMONS Issued by Court Clerk as to Tulsa Technology Center (lmt, Dpty Clk)
|
|
Filing 2
FILING FEES Paid in Full by Lou Ella Seymore (lmt, Dpty Clk)
|
|
Filing 1
COMPLAINT with Jury Demand against Tulsa Technology Center by Joseph Parker, Lou Ella Seymore, Yvette Hill (lmt, Dpty Clk)
|
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 Oklahoma Northern 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.
