Skip to content.
About GPO   |   Newsroom/Media   |   Congressional Relations   |   Inspector General   |   Careers   |   Contact   |   askGPO   |   Help  
 

  FDsys > More Information
(Search string is required)
 

14-2218 - Jones v. Pate Rehabilitation


Download Files

Metadata

Document in Context
14-2218 - Jones v. Pate Rehabilitation
June 19, 2014
PDF | More
FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE. This case has been referred to the United States Magistrate Judge for initial screening pursuant to 28 U.S.C. ยง 636(b) and a standing order of reference. The District Court should DENY Plaintiffs Application to Proceed in District Court without Prepaying Fees or Costs. Plaintiff should be ordered to pay the statutory filing fee by July 18, 2014. If he fails to do so, the case should be dismissed. (see order) (Ordered by Magistrate Judge Paul D Stickney on 6/19/2014) (mcrd)
July 7, 2014
PDF | More
Order Accepting 4 Findings, Conclusions and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge. The court therefore denies Plaintiff's Application to Proceed In District Court Without Paying Fees or Costs (Doc. 1-1) and directs Plaintiff to pay the requisite statutory filing fee by 7/18/2014. (Ordered by Judge Sam A Lindsay on 7/7/2014) (skt)
June 17, 2016
PDF | More
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER: For the reasons stated herein, the court concludes that there is no genuine dispute of material fact as to Plaintiff's Title VII sex discrimination and retaliation claims, and his ADEA retaliation claim; concludes that Pate is entitled to judgment as a matter of law on these claims; and concludes that there is a genuine dispute of material fact as to Plaintiff's ADEA age discrimination claim. Accordingly, the court grants Defendant Pate Rehabilitation Endeavors Inc's 45 Motion for Summary Judgment with respect to Plaintiff's Title VII sex discrimination and retaliation claims, and ADEA retaliation claim, and dismisses them with prejudice. The court denies Defendant Pate Rehabilitation Endeavors, Inc.'s 45 Motion for Summary Judgment with respect to Plaintiff's ADEA age discrimination claim. The age discrimination claim remains for trial, and an amended scheduling order will be entered by separate document. (Ordered by Judge Sam A Lindsay on 6/17/2016) (twd)
May 5, 2017
PDF | More
Memorandum Opinion and Order denies 107 MOTION for New Trial or to Alter or Amend the Judgment or grant Judgment as a Matter of Law. For the reasons herein stated, the court concludes that Plaintiff has not set forth sufficient legal or factual bases that would entitle him to a new trial, or that would cause the court to alter or amend the judgment. (Ordered by Judge Sam A Lindsay on 5/5/2017) (ndt)