Dos Santos v. Starbucks et al
| Claudio Morais Dos Santos |
| Starbucks, Courtney Henderson, Stevie Neet, Tony Reyes and Joanna Smith |
| 2:2018cv01787 |
| December 12, 2018 |
| US District Court for the Western District of Washington |
| Marsha J Pechman |
| Civil Rights: Jobs |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 2000 e |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on March 22, 2019. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 4
MINUTE ORDER: At the request of Plaintiff, an extension of time to file the joint status report is granted. The report will be due on 3/25/2019. All other FRCP 26-related deadlines are adjusted accordingly. Failure to adhere to these deadlines may result in sanctions, up to and including dismissal of this action. Authorized by Judge Marsha J. Pechman. Mailed to Plaintiff via USPS.(RM)
|
|
Filing 3
ORDER REGARDING INITIAL DISCLOSURES AND JOINT STATUS REPORT Joint Status Report due by 2/25/2019, FRCP 26f Conference Deadline is 2/11/2019, Initial Disclosure Deadline is 2/19/2019, by Judge Marsha J. Pechman. cc:Plaintiff via USPS (LW)
|
| Filing 2 LETTER to Filer re case number and Judge assignment. (CDA) Modified on 12/13/2018 cc plaintiff via US Mail (CDA). |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT against All Defendants (Summons(es) issued) (Receipt # SEA093772), filed by Claudio Morais Dos Santos. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet)(CDA) |
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 Washington 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.
