WILLIAMS v. ARAMARK CAMPUS LLC et al
| SHAVON WILLIAMS |
| ARAMARK CAMPUS LLC, CHRIS ANSARDI, STEVE MAUZ, LEVI CASTER and IVETTE TORRES |
| 2:2018cv05374 |
| December 11, 2018 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania |
| JOHN R PADOVA |
| Civil Rights: Employment |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 2000 e |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on March 12, 2020. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 3 STIPULATION and Proposed Order for Extension of Time to Answer, Move or Otherwise Plead in Response to Complaint (Joint) by ARAMARK CAMPUS LLC. (MARTINEZ, ANNE) *FILED IN ERROR BY ATTORNEY; COPY FORWARDED TO JUDGE FOR APPROVAL* Modified on 2/8/2019 (lisad, ). |
| Filing 2 WAIVER OF SERVICE Returned Executed by SHAVON WILLIAMS. ARAMARK CAMPUS LLC waiver sent on 12/18/2018, answer due 2/16/2019. (PECKHAM, NATHANIEL) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT against CHRIS ANSARDI, ARAMARK CAMPUS LLC, LEVI CASTER, STEVE MAUZ, IVETTE TORRES ( Filing fee $ 400 receipt number PPE189332.), filed by SHAVON WILLIAMS, JURY TRIAL DEMAND. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet, #2 Designation Form, #3 Case Management Track Form)(rf, ) |
| DEMAND for Trial by Jury by SHAVON WILLIAMS. (rf, ) |
| 5 Original Summons Issued as to CHRIS ANSARDI, ARAMARK CAMPUS LLC, LEVI CASTER, STEVE MAUZ, IVETTE TORRES forwarded to Plaintiff's Counsel on 12/11/18. (rf, ) |
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 Pennsylvania 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.
