Grey v. Khan et al
| Jeremy Grey |
| Mohammed B. Khan and Fahima Khan |
| 2:2022cv02389 |
| June 16, 2022 |
| US District Court for the Western District of Tennessee |
| Jon Phipps McCalla |
| Tu M Pham |
| Civil Rights: Americans with Disabilities - Other |
| None |
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 12 AFFIDAVIT of Service for Complaint served on Mohammed B. Khan on 6/24/22, filed by Jeremy Grey. (Stephenson, Davis) |
| Filing 11 AFFIDAVIT of Service for Complaint served on Fahima Khan on 6/24/22, filed by Jeremy Grey. (Stephenson, Davis) |
| Filing 10 Summons Issued as to Mohammed B. Khan. The filer has been notified electronically that the summons has been issued, and the new docket entry reflects this. Upon notification of the new docket entry, the filer is to print the issued summons in order to effect service. (jae) |
| Filing 9 NOTICE of Summons by Davis Stephenson on behalf of Jeremy Grey. (Stephenson, Davis) |
Filing 8
ORDER GRANTING #2 Motion for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis. Signed by Judge Jon Phipps McCalla on 6/17/2022. (mab)
|
| Filing 7 COURTESY NOTICE: Pursuant to Rule 5 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, document #2 MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis filed by Jeremy Grey has been filed. For future reference, please note : Filer failed to indicate in docket text "Proposed Order Submitted" as required by local rules. If no order previously emailed to chambers, please do so upon receipt of this notice. Please refer to the #ECF User Manual and #ECF Policies and Procedures. Filer is not required to resubmit document. (jae) |
| Filing 6 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 (jae) |
| Filing 5 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 (jae) |
| Filing 4 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 (jae) |
| Filing 3 Judge Jon Phipps McCalla and Chief Magistrate Judge Tu M. Pham added. (jae) |
| Filing 2 MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis by Jeremy Grey. (Stephenson, Davis) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT against All Defendants, filed by Jeremy Grey. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet Civil Cover Sheet, #2 Exhibit Business Entity Disclosure)(Stephenson, Davis) |
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 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.
