Lucas et al v. Daihatsu Motor Co., Ltd. et al
Plaintiff: Kathleen M. Lucas and Dan Martin
Defendant: Daihatsu Motor Co., Ltd. and Toyota Motor Corporation
Case Number: 3:2012cv02644
Filed: May 23, 2012
Court: US District Court for the Northern District of California
Office: San Francisco Office
County: Marin
Presiding Judge: Laurel Beeler
Nature of Suit: Motor Vehicle Product Liability
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 1332
Jury Demanded By: Both

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed Document Text
September 27, 2012 Opinion or Order Filing 17 ORDER GRANTING IN PART and DENYING AS MOOT IN PART 6 Daihatsu's Motion to Dismiss; GRANTING 14 Plaintiffs' Request for an Extension of Time to Toyota; and CONTINUING the Initial Case Management Conference to January 17, 2012. Plaintiff s may file a First Amended Complaint within 14 days from the date of this order. Plaintiffs may have until December 26, 2012 (which is 90 days from the date of this order) to serve Daihatsu and Toyota (or any other defendant Plaintiffs may substitut e in Toyotas place) with the First Amended Complaint. The court CONTINUES the Initial Case Management Conference from October 4, 2012 to January 17, 2012 at 10:30 a.m. Signed by Magistrate Judge Laurel Beeler on 9/27/2012. (lblc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 9/27/2012)
September 16, 2012 Opinion or Order Filing 13 ORDER Rescheduling Hearing on 6 Defendant Daihatsu's Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs' Complaint and Directing Service of Process. The court vacates the September 20, 2012 hearing and re-sets it to October 4, 2012 at 11:00 a.m. Plain tiffs are directed to serve Defendant Toyota by September 20, 2012 and to file proof of service by September 24, 2012 or risk dismissal of Defendant Toyota under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(m). Motion Hearing set for 10/4/2012 11:00 AM in Courtroom C, 15th Floor, San Francisco before Magistrate Judge Laurel Beeler. Signed by Magistrate Judge Laurel Beeler on 9/16/2012. (lblc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 9/16/2012)
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 California Northern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Lucas et al v. Daihatsu Motor Co., Ltd. et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Kathleen M. Lucas
Represented By: Cynthia Bernet McGuinn
Represented By: Miles Baker Cooper
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Dan Martin
Represented By: Miles Baker Cooper
Represented By: Cynthia Bernet McGuinn
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Daihatsu Motor Co., Ltd.
Represented By: Stephanie Pearce Alexander
Represented By: Nathaniel Tarvin
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Toyota Motor Corporation
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]

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.


Why Is My Information Online?