Erhardt v. City of Tualatin et al
| Bryan Lee Erhardt |
| City of Tualatin, Seth Ceciliani, Jessica Lemieux and James Wall |
| 3:2022cv00774 |
| May 27, 2022 |
| US District Court for the District of Oregon |
| Jeffrey Armistead |
| Civil Rights: Other |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1983 Civil Rights |
| Defendant |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on June 27, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 6
Order by Judge Armistead: The court acknowledges receipt of the parties' Joint Discovery Agreement #5 and adopts the following proposed schedule: (1) Discovery is to be completed by 9/27/2022. (2) Dispositive Motions are due by 10/27/2022. (3) Joint Alternate Dispute Resolution Report is due by 11/15/2022 if no dispositive motions are filed. If dispositive motions are filed, a Joint ADR Report shall be due after a ruling on such motions. The 8/16/2022 Rule 16 Conference is no longer necessary and is STRICKEN. (pjg)
|
| Filing 5 Joint Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(1) Agreement . Filed by Seth Ceciliani, City of Tualatin, Jessica Lemieux, James Wall. (Hisel, Aaron) |
|
Filing 4
Order issued by Judge Armistead: Setting a Rule 16 Conference for 8/16/2022 at 10:30AM in Portland by telephone before Magistrate Judge Jeffrey Armistead. Local Rules 16-2(b) and 26-1 require that counsel confer prior to the conference. Rule 16 Conferences are ordinarily held telephonically. At the conference, counsel should be prepared to discuss the status of the case, relevant dates and deadlines, and any other significant issues. If the parties plan to present a proposed schedule, they should e-mail the schedule to pam_geringer@ord.uscourts.gov, by noon on 8/12/2022. Alternatively, the parties may file a Joint Rule 26(f) Report and Discovery Plan by noon on 8/12/2022. If the proposed schedule is acceptable to the court and no significant issues need to be discussed, the court may decide that the Rule 16 Conference is unnecessary and strike it. The parties may file written consents to magistrate judge jurisdiction at any time, but the court recommends that consent forms be filed before a dispositive motion (i.e., motion to dismiss, motion for summary judgment) is heard. (The consent form is attached.) For more information regarding the role of magistrate judges and consenting to magistrate judge jurisdiction, see ord.uscourts.gov/consent. If the parties have a discovery dispute, they should jointly email Courtroom Deputy Pam Geringer at the e-mail address above, and the court will be promptly schedule a telephonic hearing to discuss the matter. (pjg)
|
| Filing 3 Answer to Complaint with Jury Demand. . Filed by City of Tualatin, Jessica Lemieux, James Wall, Seth Ceciliani. (Hisel, Aaron) |
|
Filing 2
Notice of Case Assignment to Magistrate Judge Jeffrey Armistead and Discovery and Pretrial Scheduling Order. Discovery is to be completed by 9/26/2022. Joint Alternate Dispute Resolution Report is due by 10/24/2022. Pretrial Order is due by 10/24/2022. Ordered by Magistrate Judge Jeffrey Armistead. (sb)
|
| Filing 1 Notice of Removal of Case Number 22CV14864 from Washington County Circuit Court. Filing Fee in amount of $402 collected. Agency Tracking ID: AORDC-8532835 issued.. Filed by City of Tualatin, Jessica Lemieux, James Wall, Seth Ceciliani (Attachments: #1 Exhibit 1 to Notice of Removal, #2 Civil Cover Sheet). (Hisel, Aaron) |
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 Oregon 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.
