Rodriguez v. Target Corporation
| Alma Rodriguez |
| Target Corporation |
| 1:2022cv00002 |
| January 5, 2022 |
| US District Court for the District of Utah |
| David Barlow |
| Jared C Bennett |
| Dustin B Pead |
| P.I.: Other |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1441 |
| Both |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on January 26, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 14
ORDER TO PROPOSE SCHEDULE - Plaintiff(s) must propose a discovery schedule to defendant(s) in the form of a draft Attorney Planning Meeting Report within twenty-one (21) days after any defendant has been served or any defendant has appeared, unless any party is appearing pro se. See order for additional instructions. Signed by Magistrate Judge Dustin B. Pead on 01/26/2022. (jl)
|
|
Filing 13
ORDER REFERRING CASE to Magistrate Judge Dustin B. Pead under 28:636 (b)(1)(A). Magistrate to hear and determine all nondispositive pretrial matters. No attached document. Signed by Judge David Barlow on 01/24/22. (rep)
|
| Filing 12 All Consent/Reassignment Forms have now been received. After review of all forms, Case Reassigned to District Judge per request of one or more party(s). Case randomly assigned to Judge David Barlow. Magistrate Judge Jared C. Bennett no longer assigned to the case. (alf) |
| Filing 11 RECEIVED Consent/Reassignment Form from Plaintiff Alma Rodriguez. (alf) |
| Filing 10 NOTICE REMINDER - All parties are requested to respond within the time frame set forth in the #8 Notice of Presiding Magistrate Assignment,, pursuant to General Order 07-001. If you have already consented/objected, please disregard this notice. No judge will be informed of a party's response unless all parties have consented to the assignment of the matter to a U.S. Magistrate Judge. Unless consents from all parties are received within fifteen(15) days, the case will be randomly re-assigned to a U.S. District Judge without further notice.# Link to Magistrate Consent Objection form (alf) |
| Filing 9 RECEIVED Consent/Reassignment Form from Defendant Target Corporation. (alf) |
| Filing 8 AMENDED NOTICE - This case is assigned to a magistrate judge. To consent or request reassignment, use # the form on this link or use the included form for non-efilers and send it toconsents@utd.uscourts.govwithin 15 days or mail to the court with Attention: Consent Clerk on the envelope. Notice e-mailed or mailed to Plaintiff Alma Rodriguez, Defendant Target Corporation. Form due by 1/21/2022. NOTE: Form is being resent as case number has been changed. (alf) |
| Filing 7 Case Number Reassigned. Case number will now read 1:22-cv-00002-JCB. Please make changes to document captions accordingly. (nl) |
| Filing 6 NOTICE - This case is assigned to a magistrate judge. To consent or request reassignment, use # the form on this link or use the included form for non-efilers and send it toconsents@utd.uscourts.govwithin 15 days or mail to the court with Attention: Consent Clerk on the envelope. Notice e-mailed or mailed to Plaintiff Alma Rodriguez, Defendant Target Corporation. Form due by 1/21/2022. (alf) |
| Filing 5 Modification of Docket re #4 File Received : Correction: File was downloaded from Second District, Davis County. Docket text modified to reflect correction. (alf) |
| Filing 4 File downloaded from Fourth District Utah County Second District, Davis County Web Xchange consisting of Docket Sheet, Complaint, Summons Return and applicable state court returns. (Attachments: #1 Complaint, #2 Complaint Return of Electronic Notification, #3 Summons Return, #4 Summons Return Return of Electonic Notification) (alf) Modified on 1/5/2022 to correct state court (alf). |
| Filing 3 NOTICE OF ADR, e-mailed or mailed to Plaintiff Alma Rodriguez, Defendant Target Corporation. (nmt) |
| Filing 2 NOTICE OF REMOVAL from Second District Court, Davis County, case number 210700936, (Filing fee $ 402, receipt number AUTDC-4210500) filed by Target Corporation. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet - Civil Cover Sheet, #2 Exhibit State Court Case - Docket, Complaint & Summons) Assigned to Magistrate Judge Jared C. Bennett (Weron, Kathleen) |
| Filing 1 Case has been indexed and assigned to Magistrate Judge Jared C. Bennett. Defendant Target Corporation is directed to E-File the Notice of Removal and cover sheet (found under Complaints and Other Initiating Documents) and pay the filing fee of $ 402.00 by the end of the business day.NOTE: The court will not have jurisdiction until the opening document is electronically filed and the filing fee paid in the CM/ECF system. (nmt) |
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 Utah 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
| Search for this case: Rodriguez v. Target Corporation | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Plaintiff: Alma Rodriguez | |
| Represented By: | Nathan S. Morris |
| Represented By: | Lena Daggs |
| 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: Target Corporation | |
| Represented By: | Kathleen D Weron |
| 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.
