Ramos v. Borough of Nesquehoning et al
Plaintiff: Shana Ramos
Defendant: Borough of Nesquehoning, Sean T. Smith and John Doe Police Officers 1-10
Case Number: 3:2023cv00188
Filed: February 3, 2023
Court: US District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania
Presiding Judge: Robert D Mariani
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights: Other
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 1331 Federal Question: Other Civil Rights
Jury Demanded By: Plaintiff
Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on March 9, 2023. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
March 9, 2023 Filing 7 WAIVER OF SERVICE Returned by Sean T. Smith, Borough of Nesquehoning. (Rongaus, Andrew)
March 9, 2023 Filing 6 NOTICE of Appearance by Paul Verduci on behalf of Borough of Nesquehoning, Sean T. Smith (Verduci, Paul)
March 9, 2023 Filing 5 NOTICE of Appearance by Andrew M. Rongaus on behalf of Borough of Nesquehoning, Sean T. Smith (Rongaus, Andrew)
February 14, 2023 Filing 4 SUMMONS Returned Executed by Shana Ramos. All Defendants. (Lindheim, Jerry)
February 6, 2023 Opinion or Order Filing 3 ORDER Re: Case Assignment and Procedures. You are directed to file a written report within 30 days as to whether service has been effected or a waiver of service obtained. Signed by Honorable Robert D Mariani on 2/6/23. (jam)
February 3, 2023 Filing 2 Summons Issued as to Borough of Nesquehoning, John Doe Police Officers 1-10, Sean T. Smith and provided TO ATTORNEY ELECTRONICALLY VIA ECF for service on Defendant(s)in the manner prescribed by Rule 4 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. (NOTICE TO ATTORNEYS RECEIVING THE SUMMONS ELECTRONICALLY: You must print the summons and the attachment when you receive it in your e-mail and serve the complaint on all defendants in the manner prescribed by Rule 4 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure). (Attachments: #1 Summons Packet) (ao)
February 3, 2023 Filing 1 COMPLAINT against Borough of Nesquehoning, John Doe Police Officers 1-10, Sean T. Smith ( Filing fee $402, Receipt Number BPAMDC-6188392), filed by Shana Ramos. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet)(ao)

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 Middle District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Ramos v. Borough of Nesquehoning 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: Shana Ramos
Represented By: Jerry A. Lindheim
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: Borough of Nesquehoning
Represented By: Andrew M. Rongaus
Represented By: Paul Verduci
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: Sean T. Smith
Represented By: Andrew M. Rongaus
Represented By: Paul Verduci
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: John Doe Police Officers 1-10
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?