Brown v. Fidelity Investments et al
Plaintiff: Kkoffee Marie Brown, Regina Marie Dawson and Kkoffee Marie Dawson
Defendant: Electronic Payments Systems, Fidelity Investments, EPS and Finova
Case Number: 2:2026cv00114
Filed: February 9, 2026
Court: U.S. District Court for the District of Utah
Presiding Judge: Tena Campbell
Referring Judge: Cecilia M Romero
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights: Americans with Disabilities - Employment
Cause of Action: 42 U.S.C. ยง 2000 Job Discrimination (Employment)
Jury Demanded By: None
Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on September 1, 2026. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
April 8, 2026 Opinion or Order Filing 15 DOCUMENT LODGED consisting of "Contact Information Update". Note: attached document lodged for reference purposes only; no response required unless specifically ordered by the court. (alt)
April 8, 2026 Opinion or Order Filing 14 DOCUMENT LODGED per #5 Order, 30 pages received from Plaintif Note: attached document lodged for reference purposes only; no response required unless specifically ordered by the court. (alt)
March 10, 2026 Opinion or Order Filing 13 DOCUMENTS LODGED per #5 Order, received from Plaintiff. Note: attached document lodged for reference purposes only; no response required unless specifically ordered by the court. (Attachments: #1 2nd 'document', #2 3rd 'document') (alt)
March 8, 2026 Opinion or Order Filing 12 DOCUMENTS LODGED per #5 Order, received from Plaintiff. Note: attached documents lodged for reference purposes only; no response required unless specifically ordered by the court. (Attachments: #1 2nd 'document') (alt)
March 5, 2026 Opinion or Order Filing 11 DOCUMENTS LODGED per #5 Order, received from Plaintiff. Note: attached documents lodged for reference purposes only; no response required unless specifically ordered by the court. (Attachments: #1 2nd document) (alt)
February 28, 2026 Opinion or Order Filing 10 DOCUMENT LODGED per #5 Order, 55 pages received from Plaintiff Note: attached document lodged for reference purposes only; no response required unless specifically ordered by the court. (alt)
February 25, 2026 Opinion or Order Filing 9 DOCUMENT LODGED per #5 Order, received from Plaintiff. Note: attached document lodged for reference purposes only; no response required unless specifically ordered by the court. (alt)
February 24, 2026 Opinion or Order Filing 8 DOCUMENT LODGED per #5 Order, received from Plaintiff. Note: attached document lodged for reference purposes only; no response required unless specifically ordered by the court. (alt)
February 24, 2026 Opinion or Order Filing 7 NOTICE OF NON-CONSENT Consent to the jurisdiction of the Magistrate Judge under DUCivR 72-3 has not been obtained. Case randomly assigned to Judge Tena Campbell and Magistrate Judge Cecilia M. Romero. Magistrate Judge is automatically referred under 28 U.S.C. 636(b)(1)(B). Magistrate Judge Cecilia M. Romero no longer assigned as the presiding judge to the case. Motions referred to Cecilia M. Romero.(mh)
February 24, 2026 Opinion or Order Filing 6 RECEIVED Consent/Reassignment Form from Plaintiff Kkoffee Marie Brown. (mh)
February 11, 2026 Opinion or Order Filing 5 ORDER temporarily granting #2 Motion for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis. The court will screen the complaint under 28 U.S.C. 1915(e) and DUCivR 3-2(b). The clerks office is directed to provide Plaintiff with the magistrate judge consent/reassignment form as well as the email filing and electronic notification form for unrepresented parties. Plaintiff may complete and return forms provided by the court. Other than court forms, Plaintiff must not file any motions or other documents while the case is screened or until the court orders otherwise. If such documents or motions are filed, they will be lodged on the docket and will not be addressed until screening is completed. The time to serve the complaint is tolled until further order of the court. If the action is allowed to proceed, the court will enter an order authorizing service of process on the defendant(s). Signed by Magistrate Judge Cecilia M. Romero on 02/11/2026. (sg)
February 10, 2026 Opinion or Order Filing 4 NOTICE OF PRESIDING MAGISTRATE JUDGE ASSIGNMENT - This case is assigned to a magistrate judge. Under 28 U.S.C. 636(c), Fed. R. Civ. P. 73, and DUCivR 72-3, you are hereby notified that a magistrate judge for the District of Utah may conduct any or all proceedings in this case, including a jury or bench trial and entry of a final judgment. Exercise of this jurisdiction by the magistrate judge is permitted only if all parties voluntarily sign and return the form. To consent, return the Consent Form to the clerk's office within 21 days via email at [email protected] or mail to the address on the form. Please do not efile the Consent Form in the case. Notice emailed or mailed to Plaintiff Kkoffee Marie Brown. Form due by 3/3/2026. (mh)
February 9, 2026 Opinion or Order Filing 3 NOTICE of Email Filing and Notification Form by Kkoffee Marie Brown. (sg)
February 9, 2026 Opinion or Order Filing 2 **SEALED DOCUMENT** MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis. (Received by the court on: 02/09/2026) filed by Plaintiff Kkoffee Marie Brown. (sg)
February 9, 2026 Opinion or Order Filing 1 COMPLAINT against Electronic Payments Systems, Fidelity Investments (Originally received by the court on 02/09/2026). (Fee Status: PENDING IFP) filed by Kkoffee Marie Brown. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet ) Assigned to Magistrate Judge Cecilia M. Romero (sg)

Access additional case information on PACER

Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the U.S. 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 this case: Brown v. Fidelity Investments et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Kkoffee Marie Brown
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 [ Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Regina Marie Dawson
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 [ Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Kkoffee Marie Dawson
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 [ Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Electronic Payments Systems
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 [ Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Fidelity Investments
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 [ Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: EPS
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 [ Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Finova
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 [ 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?