Celious v. Worley Limited
Plaintiff: Denise Celious
Defendant: Worley Limited and Worley Ltd d/b/a Worley Group, Inc. f/k/a Jacobs Engineering
Case Number: 4:2022cv00811
Filed: March 14, 2022
Court: US District Court for the Southern District of Texas
Presiding Judge: Lee H Rosenthal
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights: Jobs
Cause of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1981 Job Discrimination (Race)
Jury Demanded By: Plaintiff
Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on April 25, 2023. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
April 25, 2023 Filing 21 NOTICE of Appearance by Nathaniel Higgins substituting for Phillip Baggett on behalf of Worley Limited, filed. (Higgins, Nathaniel)
September 21, 2022 Filing 20 ANSWER to #16 Amended Complaint/Counterclaim/Crossclaim etc. by Worley Ltd d/b/a Worley Group, Inc. f/k/a Jacobs Engineering, filed.(Bennett, Paige)
September 5, 2022 Filing 19 ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF SERVICE by Denise Celious on 09-02-22 re: First Amended Complaint, filed.(Quan, David)
September 2, 2022 Filing 18 Summons Issued as to Worley Limited. Issued summons delivered to plaintiff by NEF, filed.(ShannonHolden, 4)
September 1, 2022 Filing 17 Request for Issuance of Summons as to Worley Ltd d/b/a Worley Group, Inc. f/k/a Jacobs Engineering, filed.(Quan, David)
September 1, 2022 Filing 16 AMENDED COMPLAINT with Jury Demand against All Defendants filed by Denise Celious. Related document: #1 Complaint filed by Denise Celious.(Quan, David)
August 4, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 15 ORDER entered: Worley Limited's motion to dismiss for insufficient service of process, (Docket Entry No. 13), is granted, but its request for attorneys' fees incurred in filing the motion is denied. Celious must properly serve Worley Limited with her complaint no later than September 6, 2022. The initial pretrial conference set for August 5, 2022, is cancelled and will be reset after proof of proper service is filed. (Signed by Chief Judge Lee H Rosenthal) Parties notified.(leddins, 4)
July 26, 2022 Filing 14 NOTICE of Resetting. Parties notified. Initial Conference reset for 8/5/2022 at 02:45 PM by video before Chief Judge Lee H Rosenthal, filed. A Zoom ink will b provided. (leddins, 4)
July 12, 2022 Filing 13 MOTION to Dismiss For Insufficient Service of Process by Worley Limited, filed. Motion Docket Date 8/2/2022. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A, #2 Proposed Order)(Bennett, Paige)
July 8, 2022 Filing 12 RETURN of Service of SUMMONS Executed as to Worley Limited served on 5/27/2022, answer due 6/17/2022, filed.(Quan, David)
June 13, 2022 Filing 11 NOTICE of Appearance by Paige T. Bennett and Phillip Baggett on behalf of Worley Limited, filed. (Bennett, Paige)
June 7, 2022 Filing 10 NOTICE of Resetting. Parties notified. Initial Conference reset for 7/29/2022 at 11:10 AM by video before Chief Judge Lee H Rosenthal, filed. A Zoom link will be provided. (leddins, 4)
May 25, 2022 Filing 9 Summons Issued as to Worley Limited. Issued summons delivered to plaintiff by NEF, filed.(AkeitaMichael, 4)
May 24, 2022 Filing 8 DOCKETED IN ERROR. Summons Issued as to Worley Limited. Issued summons delivered to plaintiff by NEF, filed.(AkeitaMichael, 4) Modified on 5/25/2022 (AkeitaMichael, 4).
May 23, 2022 Filing 7 Request for Issuance of Summons as to Worley Limited, filed.(Quan, David)
April 29, 2022 Filing 6 NOTICE of Resetting. Parties notified. Initial Conference reset for 7/6/2022 at 02:00 PM by video before Chief Judge Lee H Rosenthal, filed. A Zoom link will be provided. (leddins, 4)
April 27, 2022 Filing 5 Summons Issued as to Worley Limited. Issued summons delivered to plaintiff by NEF, filed.(ShannonHolden, 4)
April 26, 2022 Filing 4 Request for Issuance of Summons as to Worley Limited, filed.(Quan, David)
April 14, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 3 ORDER on Initial Discovery Protocols for Employment Cases Alleging Adverse Action.(Signed by Chief Judge Lee H Rosenthal) Parties notified.(leddins, 4)
March 15, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 2 ORDER Scheduling Rule 16 Conference With the Court and Setting Out the Requirements for Initial Pretrial Work. Initial Conference set for 5/25/2022 at 03:30 PM by video before Chief Judge Lee H Rosenthal. (Signed by Chief Judge Lee H Rosenthal) (Attachments: #1 Attachments) Parties notified.(BrandisIsom, 4)
March 14, 2022 Filing 1 COMPLAINT against Worley Limited (Filing fee $ 402 receipt number ATXSDC-27878081) filed by Denise Celious.(Quan, David)

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 this case: Celious v. Worley Limited
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Denise Celious
Represented By: David J Quan
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 [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Worley Limited
Represented By: Paige T. Bennett
Represented By: Nathaniel J Higgins
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 [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Worley Ltd d/b/a Worley Group, Inc. f/k/a Jacobs Engineering
Represented By: Paige T. Bennett
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 [ Unicourt | 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?