Wallace v. FIMCO Inc.
| Roscoe Wallace |
| FIMCO Inc. doing business as FIMCO Industries |
| 4:2023cv04045 |
| March 22, 2023 |
| US District Court for the District of South Dakota |
| Karen E Schreier |
| Civil Rights: Employment |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 2000 e Job Discrimination (Employment) |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on March 29, 2023. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 4 REGISTRATION for Electronic Notice by Roscoe Wallace. Pro se party Roscoe Wallace will now receive electronic notice of unsealed documents filed in this case. Refer to the CM/ECF User Manual located on the court website at www.sdd.uscourts.gov for information about accessing documents. (CLR) |
| Filing 3 NOTICE TO PLAINTIFF: The Clerks Office has received your Complaint together with the filing fee and completed summons. A new case has been opened. Your summmons has been issued. You are responsible for arranging service of the summons and complaint on the defendant. Copy of docket sheet sent to plaintiff. Pro Se Litigant Registration Form for Electronic Notice also sent to plaintiff. Any further documents or correspondence you send to the Clerks Office concerning your case must include the case number. All documents submitted for filing must also contain an original signature. Pursuant to the E-Government Act and D.S.D. Civ. LR 5.2, you must redact personal identifiers from documents submitted to the Court. The Clerks Office will not review for compliance. Submitted documents are electronically scanned for filing and they become the official court record. The quality of the official court record is determined by the quality of the original documents received for filing. Writing should only be on one side of the paper and writing must be dark enough for scanning. All documents must be on 8.5 x 11 inch paper. A request to electronically file documents in your case must be made through the PACER Service Center at www.pacer.uscourts.gov. The plaintiff must keep the Court informed of the plaintiff's address changes, including changes to primary and secondary email addresses. If the Court is not kept informed and multiple items are returned as undelivered, the plaintiff's case may be dismissed without prejudice for failure to prosecute. (CLR) |
| Filing 2 Summons Issued as to FIMCO Inc. 1 Summons, Rule 73 Memo, and AO 85 delivered via hand delivery to law office staff (plaintiff appearing pro se). (CLR) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT with Jury Demand, $402 fee paid, receipt# 400001567. (Attachments: #1 Envelope 1 - Determination and Notice of Rights Letter) (CLR) |
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 South Dakota 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: Wallace v. FIMCO Inc. | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Plaintiff: Roscoe Wallace | |
| 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: FIMCO Inc. doing business as FIMCO Industries | |
| 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.
