Williams v. ABM Industries, Incorporated
Plaintiff: Deborah Williams
Defendant: ABM Industries, Incorporated
Case Number: 2:2021cv02117
Filed: February 26, 2021
Court: US District Court for the Western District of Tennessee
Presiding Judge: Charmiane G Claxton
Referring Judge: Sheryl H Lipman
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights: Jobs
Cause of Action: 42 U.S.C. ยง 2000 e
Jury Demanded By: Plaintiff
Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on March 8, 2021. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
March 8, 2021 Pursuant to Administrative Order 2013-05, this case has been assigned to the United States magistrate judge for management of all pretrial matters. Pursuant to Local Rule 4.1(b)(1), the plaintiff shall present the Clerk with a properly completed summons for each defendant, and the Clerk shall issue the summons(es) to the plaintiff for service on the defendant(s). (csf)
March 8, 2021 Filing 7 Summons Issued as to ABM Industries, Incorporated. (agj)
March 8, 2021 Filing 6 Case initiation fee: $ 402.00, receipt number M4676048354 (agj)
March 1, 2021 Filing 5 NOTICE OF RIGHT TO CONSENT TO THE EXERCISE OF CIVIL JURISDICTION BY A MAGISTRATE JUDGE Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 636(c), Fed.R.Civ.P.73, and Local Rule 72.1, this Court has designated the Magistrate Judges of this District to conduct trials and otherwise dispose of any civil case that is filed in this Court. Your decision to consent, or not consent, to the referral of your case to a United States Magistrate Judge for trial and entry of a final judgment must be entirely voluntary. The judge or magistrate judge to whom the case has been assigned will not be informed of your decision unless all parties agree that the case may be referred to a magistrate judge for these specific purposes. A less than unanimous decision will not be communicated by this office to either the judge or magistrate judge. The consent form is available on the courts website at https://www.tnwd.uscourts.gov/forms-and-applications.php (btg)
March 1, 2021 Filing 4 NOTICE TO COMPLY WITH PLAN FOR ALTERNATE DISPUTE RESOLUTION (ADR): Pursuant to Section to 2.1 of the ADR Plan, all civil cases filed on or after Sept. 1, 2014, shall be referred automatically for ADR. For compliance requirements, refer to the ADR Plan at: http://www.tnwd.uscourts.gov/pdf/content/ADRPlan.pdf (btg)
March 1, 2021 Filing 3 NOTICE OF CASE TRACKING ASSIGNMENT PURSUANT TO LOCAL RULE 16.2: Pursuant to Local Rule 16.2, this case has been assigned to the Standard track. http://www.tnwd.uscourts.gov/pdf/content/LocalRules.pdf (btg)
February 26, 2021 Filing 2 Judge Sheryl H. Lipman and Magistrate Judge Charmiane G. Claxton added. (btg)
February 26, 2021 Filing 1 PRO SE COMPLAINT against ABM Industries, Incorporated, filed by Deborah Williams. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet, #2 EEOC Right to Sue Letter & Charge of Discrimination)(btg)

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 Tennessee Western District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Williams v. ABM Industries, Incorporated
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Deborah Williams
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: ABM Industries, Incorporated
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?