Case reassigned to Judge Jacqueline Scott Corley under General Order No. 44
Case Summary
The case was reassigned to Judge Jacqueline Scott Corley under General Order No. 44. This reassignment followed a proportionate, random, and blind system. Magistrate Judge Sallie Kim was removed from the case.
Latest development
ORDER REASSIGNING CASE. Case reassigned using a proportionate, random, and blind system pursuant to General Order No. 44 to Judge Jacqueline Scott Corley for all further proceedings. Magistrate Judge Sallie Kim no
Order · May 10, 2026
Judge Jacqueline Scott Corley issued an order.
Key Issues
- • Case reassignment
- • Random and blind assignment process
- • Removal of magistrate judge
Docket Snapshot
Court
Court not identified
Awaiting court metadata
Docket
Not captured
Civil
Stage
Court order issued
Active
Filed
Date unavailable
Not in the available feed
Latest Filing
ORDER REASSIGNING CASE. Case reassigned using a proportionate, random, and blind system pursuant to General Order No.
Order · May 10, 2026
Coverage
0 articles
0 sources tracked
Participants
1 Presiding Judge
2 linked entities
Judge
Jacqueline Scott Corley
What the record shows
The court metadata has not been resolved yet, so Juryvine is keeping the page conservative until a reliable court match lands.
The newest docket activity we have is a order dated May 10, 2026.
The visible party/entity graph currently includes Jacqueline Scott Corley and others.
No independent press coverage is attached yet; this page is currently docket-led rather than media-led.
The Story So Far
The case was reassigned to Judge Jacqueline Scott Corley on April 9, 2025. The reassignment followed a proportionate, random, and blind selection process under General Order No. 44.
Magistrate Judge Sallie Kim is no longer involved in the case. The court did not attach any documents to the reassignment entry. The docket number is 44, but the originating court is not specified in the available records.
The reassignment signals a fresh start under Judge Corley’s oversight for all further proceedings. There is no public information yet on the case’s subject matter or parties. The reassignment order itself is procedural and does not address any substantive issues.
The case remains active, with no filings or motions reported before or after the reassignment. The next significant development will likely come from Judge Corley’s initial case management orders or scheduling decisions. The absence of Magistrate Judge Kim suggests the case will proceed solely before the district judge going forward.
The court’s use of a blind, random system aims to ensure impartiality in judge assignments. The docket entry does not provide clues about the case’s nature, so tracking future filings will be necessary to understand the dispute. As of now, the case status is open but dormant pending Judge Corley’s engagement.
update What Changed This Week
receipt_long Source expand_more
ORDER REASSIGNING CASE. Case reassigned using a proportionate, random, and blind system pursuant to General Order No. 44 to Judge Jacqueline Scott Corley for all further proceedings. Magistrate Judge Sallie Kim no longer assigned to case, (This is a text-only entry generated by the court. There is no document associated with this entry.) (ark, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/9/2025) (Entered: 04/09/2025)
Juryvine summaries are generated from court records. Expand "Source" on any row to see the underlying filing.
Case Timeline
1 eventORDER REASSIGNING CASE. Case reassigned using a proportionate, random, and blind system pursuant to General Order No. 44 to Judge Jacqueline Scott Corley for all further proceedings. Magistrate Judge Sallie Kim no longer assigned to case, (This is a text-only entry generated by the court. There is no document
Judge Jacqueline Scott Corley issued an order.
settings_backup_restore Data provenance expand_more
Sources tracked
0 outlets · 0 articles
Timeline events
1 record on file
Last updated
5 hours, 14 minutes ago
Juryvine aggregates docket entries from PACER/CourtListener, press coverage, and GDELT signals. Ingestion timestamps do not appear in the What Changed feed — that reflects real court activity only.