PREVITE v. ARAMARK
| KAREN PREVITE |
| ARAMARK |
| 2:2022cv00647 |
| May 2, 2022 |
| US District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania |
| Christy Criswell Wiegand |
| Civil Rights: Jobs |
| 29 U.S.C. ยง 621 Job Discrimination (Age) |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on June 30, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 8
ORDER SETTING INITIAL SCHEDULING CONFERENCE: Initial Case Management Conference set for 7/28/2022 at 9:30 AM via Telephonic Conference before Judge Christy Criswell Wiegand. Rule 26 Meeting to be conducted on or before 7/14/2022. Rule 26 Meeting Report and ADR Stipulation due by 7/21/2022. Confidential Position Letters due by 7/25/2022. Signed by Judge Christy Criswell Wiegand on 6/30/2022. (jmm)
|
| Filing 7 ANSWER to #1 Complaint Defendant's Answer and Affirmative and Other Defenses to Plaintiff's Complaint by ARAMARK. (Barber, Andrew) |
| Filing 6 Disclosure Statement identifying Aramark Educational Services, LLC, Aramark Educational Group, LLC, Aramark Services, Inc., Aramark Intermediate HoldCo Corp., Aramark as corporate parent or other affiliate, by ARAMARK. (Barber, Andrew) |
| Filing 5 WAIVER OF SERVICE Returned Executed by KAREN PREVITE. ARAMARK waiver sent on 5/4/2022, answer due 7/5/2022. (Kennedy, Nicholas) |
| Filing 4 AT&T SCHEDULING NOTICE FOR ALL TELEPHONIC CONFERENCES. Every Telephonic Conference conducted will be via an AT&T call-in number which requires participants to dial-in and provide an access code. When a Telephonic Conference is scheduled you will be instructed to refer back to this Notice. This document has a security setting of "Case Participants Only," so only those individuals will have access to view the document. (jmm) |
|
Filing 3
ORDER re Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b) Motions to Dismiss as more fully stated in said order. Signed by Judge Christy Criswell Wiegand on 5/4/2022. (jmm)
|
| Filing 2 NOTICE that instant civil action has been designated for placement into the United States District Court's Alternative Dispute Resolution program. Parties are directed to fully complete the required 26(f) report, which includes the stipulation of selecting an ADR process. Counsel for plaintiff shall make service of the notice on all parties. (jmm) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT against ARAMARK (Filing fee, including Administrative fee, $402, receipt number APAWDC-7081511), filed by KAREN PREVITE. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet) (ijh) |
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 Western 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
| Search for this case: PREVITE v. ARAMARK | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Plaintiff: KAREN PREVITE | |
| Represented By: | Nicholas W. Kennedy |
| 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: ARAMARK | |
| Represented By: | Andrew J. Barber |
| 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.
