RAMOS v. SDH SERVICES EAST, LLC et al
| ARAYAHN S. RAMOS |
| SDH SERVICES EAST, LLC and PROMEDICA OF OLD ORCHARD |
| 5:2023cv00288 |
| January 24, 2023 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania |
| JEFFREY L SCHMEHL |
| Civil Rights: Employment |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 2000 Job Discrimination (Sex) |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on February 9, 2023. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 6 Summons Issued on Amended Complaint as to PROMEDICA OF OLD ORCHARD, SDH SERVICES EAST, LLC. Forwarded To: Counsel on 2/9/23. (dt) |
| Filing 5 AMENDED COMPLAINT against All Defendants All Defendants., filed by ARAYAHN S. RAMOS.(HARRISON, JOHN) |
| Filing 4 WAIVER OF SERVICE Returned Executed by ARAYAHN S. RAMOS. SDH SERVICES EAST, LLC waiver sent on 2/7/2023, answer due 4/10/2023. (HARRISON, JOHN) |
| Filing 3 Summons Issued as to PROMEDICA OF OLD ORCHARD, SDH SERVICES EAST, LLC. Forwarded To: Counsel on 1/24/23 (dt) |
| Filing 2 NOTICE of Appearance by ERIKA A. FARKAS on behalf of ARAYAHN S. RAMOS (FARKAS, ERIKA) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT against All Defendants ( Filing fee $ 402 receipt number APAEDC-16451681.), filed by ARAYAHN S. RAMOS. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet, #2 Designation Form, #3 Case Management Track Form)(HARRISON, JOHN) |
| Jury Trial Demanded by Plaintiff RAYAHN S. RAMOS. (dt) |
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.
