Torres v. Carescope LLC et al
Antonett Torres |
Carescope LLC, Bianca Vue and Frank Sim |
2:2015cv00198 |
January 26, 2015 |
US District Court for the Eastern District of California |
Sacramento Office |
Sacramento |
Carolyn K. Delaney |
Troy L. Nunley |
Fair Labor Standards Act |
29 U.S.C. ยง 201 |
Plaintiff |
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
Document Text |
---|
Filing 93 STIPULATION AND ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Carolyn K. Delaney on 6/27/2022 AMENDING Dismissal date to comply with settlement agreement and ORDERING that Plaintiff's deadline to submit a Request of Dismissal of the Litigation with prejudice is SET for 5/25/2024 contingent on Defendant's compliance with the payment schedule. The Clerk of Court is directed to administratively close this case. CASE CLOSED. (Mena-Sanchez, L) |
Filing 88 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Allison Claire on 4/29/22 GRANTING 87 Request for Continuation of Deadlines. Parties' deadline to submit the settlement agreement is EXTENDED by two weeks until 5/12/22. Parties' deadline to submit dismissal of the action is EXTENDED by two weeks until 5/27/2022.(Kastilahn, A) |
Filing 86 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Allison Claire on 4/15/2022 GRANTING 85 Request for Continuation of Deadlines. Parties' deadline to submit the settlement agreement is EXTENDED by two weeks until 4/28/2022. Parties' deadline to submit dismissal of the action is EXTENDED by two weeks until 5/13/2022. (Zignago, K.) |
Filing 77 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Carolyn K. Delaney on 12/06/21 ORDERING parties to file a further updated joint statement regarding the status of their discovery dispute by 01/03/22. (Benson, A.) |
Filing 56 ORDER signed by District Judge Troy L. Nunley on 11/24/2020 GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART Defendants' 38 Motion for Partial Judgment on the Pleadings and Plaintiff's 43 Motion for Partial Summary Judgment. The parties are ORDERED to file a Joint Notice of Trial Readiness within thirty (30) days indicating their readiness to proceed to trial and proposing trial dates. (Zignago, K.) |
Filing 32 ORDER signed by District Judge Troy L. Nunley on 6/15/2017 ORDERING: the Plaintiff to file her Motion for Class Certification within thirty (30) days of this order. ORDEREDING the parties to file an updated Joint Status Report on the same date propos ing new dates with regards to the remainder of the Scheduling Order. If Plaintiff has chosen to continue as an individual, then the parties shall propose new dates for discovery and preparation for trial. Failure to adhere to this Court will result in the imposition of sanctions. (Washington, S) |
Filing 29 STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Carolyn K. Delaney on 1/9/2017. (Jackson, T) |
Filing 24 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Carolyn K. Delaney on 12/8/2016 ORDERING that the 17 Motion to Compel is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART. The motion is DENIED with respect to production of documents. The motion to compel is GRANTED with resp ect to interrogatories nos. 1-3. Within fourteen days, further responses shall be provided, limited to caregivers for the time period 2012-to the present. Any discovery produced pursuant to this order shall be used solely for purposes of this litigation and shall be subject to a stipulated protective order, which shall be submitted by the parties within fourteen days. (Zignago, K.) |
Filing 12 ORDER signed by District Judge Troy L. Nunley on 5/10/2016 DENYING 7 Defendants' Motion to Dismiss or Alternatively to Stay Proceedings. (Reader, L) |
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 Eastern 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.