Ahmad v. Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration
Tariq Ahmad |
Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration |
4:2019cv00082 |
October 3, 2019 |
US District Court for the District of Utah |
Paul Kohler |
David Nuffer |
Other Statutory Actions |
28 U.S.C. ยง 2201 |
None |
Docket Report
This docket was last retrieved on June 21, 2021. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
Document Text |
---|
Filing 9 ORDER granting #8 Motion for Extension of Time to Proposed Schedule. Signed by Magistrate Judge Paul Kohler on 10/30/19 (alt) |
Filing 8 MOTION for Extension of Time Scheduling Requirements and Memorandum in Support filed by Defendant Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration. (Attachments: #1 Text of Proposed Order) Motions referred to Paul Kohler. Attorney Jared C. Bennett added to party Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration(pty:dft)(Bennett, Jared) |
Filing 7 DOCUMENT LODGED consisting of summons that does not show who accepted service for an agency or where. Note: attached document lodged for reference purposes only; no response required unless specifically ordered by the court. (alt) |
Filing 6 DOCUMENT LODGED consisting of summons that does not show who actually accepted service for an agency. Note: attached document lodged for reference purposes only; no response required unless specifically ordered by the court. (alt) |
Filing 5 ORDER REFERRING CASE to Magistrate Judge Paul Kohler under 28:636 (b)(1)(A), Magistrate to hear and determine all nondispositive pretrial matters. No attached document. Signed by Judge David Nuffer on 10/4/2019. (asb) |
Filing 4 ORDER TO PROPOSE SCHEDULE - Plaintiff must propose a schedule to defendant in the form of a draft Attorney Planning Meeting Report within the earlier of fourteen(14) days after any defendant has appeared or twenty-eight (28) days after any defendant has been served with the complaint. See order for additional instructions. Signed by Magistrate Judge Paul Kohler on 10/4/2019. (jwt) |
Filing 3 NOTICE FROM THE COURT This case is assigned to the Southern Region of the Central Division of the District of Utah. More information is on the court's #Southern Region web page. (asb) |
Filing 2 **RESTRICTED DOCUMENT**Summons Issued as to Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration. (tlh) |
Filing 1 COMPLAINT against Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (Filing fee $ 400, receipt number 4681088058) (Fee Status: PAID) filed by Tariq Ahmad. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet ) Assigned to Judge David Nuffer (tlh) |
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: Ahmad v. Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration | |
---|---|
Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
Plaintiff: Tariq Ahmad | |
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: Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration | |
Represented By: | Jared C. 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.