Lori Wagner v. Copart Inc et al
| Lori Wagner |
| Copart Inc and Does |
| 2:2014cv05569 |
| July 17, 2014 |
| US District Court for the Central District of California |
| John E. McDermott |
| George H. King |
| Fraud or Truth-In-Lending |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
95
JUDGMENT by Judge George H. King related to: ORDER ACCEPTING FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE, 94 . IT IS ADJUDGED that the action is dismissed without prejudice. (MD JS-6, Case Terminated). (iva)
|
|
Filing
50
MINUTES (IN CHAMBERS): ORDER by Magistrate Judge David T. Bristow: RE 31 Motion to Dismiss ; 44 Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction ; 46 Motion to Dismiss Case. As this Court has not yetcompleted its screening of the First Amended C omplaint, the Motions to Dismiss are hereby STAYED. In the event the Court determines the First Amended Complaint states a claim on which relief may be granted, the Court will order plaintiff to file an opposition to the Motions. Accordingly, the Motions to Dismiss [Dkt. Nos. 31, 44, 46], are hereby STAYED pending the Court's screening of the First Amended Complaint. Accordingly, the hearings noticed for March 5, 2015 and April 2, 2015, are ordered offcalendar. (dc)
|
|
Filing
13
MINUTE ORDER IN CHAMBERS by Judge George H. King: On July 17, 2014, Plaintiff Lori Wagner ("Plaintiff") filed this action. Review of the docket indicates that Plaintiff has not filed proof of service to Defendant Copart, Inc. ("Defen dant"). Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure Rule 4(m), Plaintiff has 120 days from the time of filing to complete service of process and is hereby ORDERED to serve Defendant by November 17, 2014. If Plaintiff fails to serve Defenda nt and file proof of service by November 17, 2014, Plaintiff SHALL, by the same deadline, show cause, in writing, why this case should not be dismissed for failure to comply with Rule 4(m), failure to diligently prosecute, and failure to comply with our Order. Refer to the Court's order for details. (pso)
|
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 California Central 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.
