Doe v. FedEx Ground Package System Inc et al
| John Doe |
| C. A., FedEx Ground Package System Inc and V. H. |
| 4:2020cv00978 |
| December 27, 2020 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of Texas |
| Sean D Jordan |
| Racketeer/Corrupt Organization |
| 18 U.S.C. ยง 1964 |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on February 13, 2021. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 2 MOTION To Proceed Via Pseudonym by John Doe. (Attachments: #1 Text of Proposed Order)(Freeman, Jason) |
| In accordance with the provisions of 28 USC Section 636(c), you are hereby notified that a U.S. Magistrate Judge of this district court is available to conduct any or all proceedings in this case including a jury or non-jury trial and to order the entry of a final judgment. The form #Consent to Proceed Before Magistrate Judge is available on our website. All signed consent forms, excluding pro se parties, should be filed electronically using the event Notice Regarding Consent to Proceed Before Magistrate Judge. (baf, ) |
| Case ASSIGNED to District Judge Sean D. Jordan. (baf, ) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT against All Defendants ( Filing fee $ 402 receipt number 0540-8169514.), filed by John Doe. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet, #2 Exhibit A-1, #3 Exhibit A-2, #4 Exhibit A-3, #5 Exhibit A-4, #6 Exhibit B, #7 Exhibit C)(Freeman, Jason) |
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 Texas Eastern 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.
