Rhodes v. USA Today et al
Plaintiff: Elmer Stewart Rhodes, III
Defendant: USA TODAY, Gannett Co Inc doing business as USA TODAY, Will Carless and Tasha Adams
Case Number: 4:2025cv01196
Filed: October 31, 2025
Court: U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas
Presiding Judge: Bill Davis
Referring Judge: Sean D Jordan
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights: Other
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Federal Question: Other Civil Rights
Jury Demanded By: Plaintiff
Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on May 29, 2026. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
April 2, 2026 Opinion or Order Filing 9 ORDER. More than 90 days ago, plaintiff Elmer Stewart Rhodes, III, filed a complaint against several defendants. Dkt. #3 . The defendants have not appeared, and no executed summonses have been returned for them. To avoid dismissal under Rule 4(m), if more than 90 days are necessary for service of process, the plaintiff must execute a verified petition regarding service of process, advising the court: 1) that the case should not be dismissed as to the unserved defendants; 2) that the failure to serve the unserved defendants is not due to the fault of the party or counsel seeking to avoid dismissal; 3) of the reasons the case against the unserved defendants should not be dismissed, set forth in detail and demonstrating good cause; and 4) that service will be effected on the unserved defendants within 30 days of the date of the petition. It is ORDERED that the plaintiff file the petition within 14 days of the docketing of this order. If dismissal of the case as to the unserved defendants is satisfactory to the plaintiff, or if the plaintiff cannot accurately make one or more of the representations noted above, no action is required. Failure to respond will result in dismissal of the claims against the unserved defendants for failure to prosecute. Signed by Magistrate Judge Bill Davis on 4/2/2026. (jmb)
April 2, 2026 Clerk's Notice of Mailing - Doc(s) #9 mailed to Elmer Stewart Rhodes, III at the address indicated on the NEF unless otherwise indicated. Mail type: Regular. (jmb)
January 5, 2026 Filing fee: $ 405, receipt number 27UBEEP5. Fee received on 12/31/2025 (psm)
December 17, 2025 Opinion or Order Filing 8 Standing Order on Motions to Seal in Civil Cases. Signed by District Judge Sean D. Jordan on 12/15/2025. (lrl)
December 17, 2025 Clerk's Notice of Mailing - Doc(s) #8 mailed to Plaintiff at the address indicated on the NEF unless otherwise indicated. Mail type: Regular. (mmc)
December 3, 2025 Opinion or Order Filing 7 ORDER: It is ORDERED that, within 30 days of the entry of this order, Rhodes must either pay the filing fee or submit an application to proceed in forma pauperis. Signed by Magistrate Judge Bill Davis on 12/3/2025. (mmc)
December 3, 2025 Clerk's Notice of Mailing - Doc(s) #7 mailed to Plaintiff at the address indicated on the NEF unless otherwise indicated. Mail type: Regular. (mmc)
October 31, 2025 Filing 6 Case assigned to District Judge Sean D. Jordan and referred to Magistrate Judge Bill Davis. (Attachments: #1 Magistrate Referral) (rpc)
October 31, 2025 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. (Copy of the notice to be sent by US Mail to parties not electronically noticed.) (rpc)
October 31, 2025 Note: Pursuant to Local Rule CV 7(j), any motions pending in another federal or state court made by any party will be considered moot at the time of transfer or removal unless they are re-urged in this court. (rpc)
October 31, 2025 Filing 5 Case transferred in from District of Texas Northern; Case Number 3:25-cv-02924. Original file certified copy of transfer order and docket sheet received. Pursuant to LR CV-7(j), other than in a prisoner case, any motion pending in the transferor district is considered moot, has been terminated, and must be re-urged to be considered in this district.
October 30, 2025 Opinion or Order Filing 4 Order Transferring to Another District: Case transferred to Sherman Division Division of Eastern District of Texas. (Ordered by Magistrate Judge Rebecca Rutherford on 10/30/2025) (knb) [Transferred from Texas Northern on 10/31/2025.]
October 29, 2025 Filing 3 COMPLAINT WITH JURY DEMAND against Tasha Adams, Will Carless, Gannett Co Inc, USA Today filed by Elmer Stewart Rhodes, III. Unless exempted, attorneys who are not admitted to practice in the Northern District of Texas must seek admission promptly. Forms, instructions, and exemption information may be found at www.txnd.uscourts.gov, or by clicking here: # Attorney Information - Bar Membership. If admission requirements are not satisfied within 21 days, the clerk will notify the presiding judge. (cfk) [Transferred from Texas Northern on 10/31/2025.]
October 29, 2025 Filing 2 Notice and Instruction to Pro Se Party. (cfk) [Transferred from Texas Northern on 10/31/2025.]
October 29, 2025 Filing 1 New Case Notes: A filing fee has not been paid. CASREF case referral set and case referred to Magistrate Judge Rutherford (see Special Order 3). Case received over counter or electronically. No prior sanctions found. (For court use only - links to the #national and #circuit indexes.) Pursuant to Misc. Order 6, Plaintiff is provided the Notice of Right to Consent to Proceed Before A U.S. Magistrate Judge (Judge Rutherford). Clerk to provide copy to plaintiff if not received electronically. (cfk) [Transferred from Texas Northern on 10/31/2025.]
October 29, 2025 ***Clerk's Notice of delivery: (see NEF for details) Docket No:1, 2. Wed Oct 29 14:21:24 CDT 2025 (crt) [Transferred from Texas Northern on 10/31/2025.]

Access additional case information on PACER

Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the U.S. 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 this case: Rhodes v. USA Today et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Elmer Stewart Rhodes, III
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 [ Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: USA TODAY
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 [ Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Gannett Co Inc doing business as USA TODAY
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 [ Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Will Carless
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 [ Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Tasha Adams
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 [ 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?