McLaughlin v. CN Associates, Inc. et al
Kevin McLaughlin |
CN Associates, Inc. and Thermo Fisher Scientific, Inc. |
4:2020cv02707 |
August 3, 2020 |
US District Court for the Southern District of Texas |
Vanessa D Gilmore |
Civil Rights: Jobs |
42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 |
None |
Docket Report
This docket was last retrieved on September 4, 2020. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
Document Text |
---|
Filing 5 MOTION to Dismiss Under Rule 12(b)(6) by CN Associates, Inc., Thermo Fisher Scientific, Inc., filed. Motion Docket Date 9/25/2020. (Attachments: #1 Proposed Order)(Raney, Christopher) |
Filing 4 CERTIFICATE OF INTERESTED PARTIES by CN Associates, Inc., Thermo Fisher Scientific, Inc., filed.(Raney, Christopher) |
Filing 3 ORDER for Initial Pretrial and Scheduling Conference and Order to Disclose Interested Persons. Initial Conference set for 12/4/2020 at 01:30 PM in Courtroom 9A before Judge Vanessa D Gilmore. (Signed by Judge Vanessa D Gilmore) Parties notified.(jdavadi, 4) |
Filing 2 NOTICE to Pro Se Litigant of Case Opening. Party notified, filed. (jdav, 4) |
Filing 1 COMPLAINT against All Defendants filed by Kevin McLaughlin. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet)(jdav, 4) |
filing Filing fee: $400.00 re: #1 Complaint, receipt number HOU096815, filed. (jdav, 4) |
Summons Issued as to CN Associates, Inc., Thermo Fisher Scientific, Inc.. Issued summons delivered to plaintiff in person, filed.(jdav, 4) |
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 Southern 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.