Pena v. Atascosa County et al
John Pena |
Atascosa County and City of Pleasanton |
5:2024cv00199 |
February 23, 2024 |
US District Court for the Western District of Texas |
Henry J Bemporad |
Jason K Pulliam |
Civil Rights: Jobs |
42 U.S.C. ยง 2000 e Job Discrimination (Employment) |
Both |
Docket Report
This docket was last retrieved on April 19, 2024. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
Document Text |
---|
Filing 14 SUPPLEMENT to #12 MOTION for Leave to File to Abate its Rule 12(b)(6) Motion to Dismiss in Order to Comply with Court's Standing Order Defendant's Supplemental Certificate of Conference by Atascosa County. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A-1, #2 Exhibit A-2)(Blanchette, Robin) |
Filing 13 RESPONSE to Motion, filed by John Pena, re #10 Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim Upon Which Relief May be Granted filed by Defendant Atascosa County (mgr) |
Motion (included in de #13) to Dismiss Pursuant to FRCP12(b)(6) and Plaintiff's Motion to Deny Defendant's MOTION and/or in the Alternative Grant Leave to File Amended Complaint by John Pena.. Motions referred to Judge Henry J. Bemporad. (mgr) |
Filing 12 MOTION for Leave to File to Abate its Rule 12(b)(6) Motion to Dismiss in Order to Comply with Court's Standing Order by Atascosa County.. Motions referred to Judge Henry J. Bemporad. (Blanchette, Robin) |
Filing 11 Original ANSWER to #1 Complaint with Jury Demand Subject to its Rule 12 (B)(6) Motion to Dismiss by Atascosa County.(Blanchette, Robin) |
Filing 10 Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim Upon Which Relief May be Granted by Atascosa County. (Blanchette, Robin) |
Set/Reset Deadlines: City of Pleasanton answer due 5/17/2024. (mgr) |
Filing 9 Unopposed MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply DEFENDANT CITY OF PLEASANTON'S UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE RESPONSIVE PLEADING by City of Pleasanton. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A, #2 Proposed Order). Motions referred to Judge Henry J. Bemporad. (Rodriguez, Clarissa) |
Text Order GRANTING #9 DEFENDANT CITY OF PLEASANTON'S UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE RESPONSIVE PLEADING. Responsive pleading due May 17, 2024. Entered by Judge Henry J. Bemporad. (This is a text-only entry generated by the court. There is no document associated with this entry.) (HJB) |
Filing 8 SUMMONS Returned Executed Atascosa County served on 3/14/2024, answer due 4/4/2024. (bt) |
Filing 7 SUMMONS Returned Executed City of Pleasanton served on 3/13/2024, answer due 4/3/2024. (bt) |
Filing 5 ORDER REFERRING CASE to Magistrate Judge Henry J. Bemporad. Signed by Judge Jason K. Pulliam. (mgr) |
Filing 4 STANDING ORDER for procedure in cases before Judge Pulliam. All parties and counsel are directed to review Judge Pulliam's Standing Order containing rules of practice, particularly the requirement of conference before filing a Motion to Dismiss under Federal Rule 12(b)(6) and demonstration of complete diversity. Failure to follow these rules of practice could result in the Court striking the Motion to Dismiss on its own initiative without further notice. Signed by Judge Jason Pulliam. (bot1) |
Filing 3 Case Opening Letter to John Pena. (vl) |
Filing 2 Summons Issued as to Atascosa County, City of Pleasanton. (vl) |
Filing 1 COMPLAINT (Filing fee $405.00 receipt number 4424), filed by John Pena. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet, #2 Filing Fee Receipt)(vl) |
If ordered by the court, all referrals will be assigned to Magistrate Judge Bemporad. (vl) |
THIS CASE HAS BEEN RANDOMLY ASSIGNED TO JUDGE JASON K. PULLIAM. (vl) |
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 Western 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.