Mejia v. Sushi Masa Sugar Land LLC et al
Maximo Humberto Machic Mejia |
Sushi Masa Sugar Land LLC and Sen Yu |
4:2022cv00131 |
January 13, 2022 |
US District Court for the Southern District of Texas |
Sim Lake |
Labor: Fair Standards |
Plaintiff |
Docket Report
This docket was last retrieved on July 26, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
Document Text |
---|
Filing 7 RETURN of Service of SUMMONS Executed as to Sen Yu served on 1/21/2022, answer due 2/11/2022, filed.(Dore, James) |
Filing 6 RETURN of Service of SUMMONS Executed as to Sushi Masa Sugar Land LLC served on 1/21/2022, answer due 2/11/2022, filed.(Dore, James) |
Filing 5 ORDER for Initial Pretrial and Scheduling Conference and Order to Disclose Interested Persons. Initial Conference set for 4/29/2022 at 02:00 PM in Courtroom 9B before Judge Sim Lake. (Signed by Judge Sim Lake) Parties notified.(BrandisIsom, 4) |
Filing 4 Summons Issued as to Sushi Masa Sugar Land LLC, Sen Yu. Issued summons delivered to plaintiff by NEF, filed.(ShannonHolden, 4) |
Filing 3 CERTIFICATE OF INTERESTED PARTIES by Maximo Humberto Machic Mejia, filed.(Dore, James) |
Filing 2 Request for Issuance of Summons as to All Defendants, filed. (Attachments: #1 Supplement)(Dore, James) |
Filing 1 COMPLAINT against All Defendants (Filing fee $ 402 receipt number 0541-27603685) filed by Maximo Humberto Machic Mejia. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet)(Dore, James) |
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.