Nelson v. Avon Products, Inc.
| Jacqueline Cavalier Nelson |
| Avon Products, Inc. and Does 1 through 50 |
| 5:2013cv02276 |
| May 17, 2013 |
| US District Court for the Northern District of California |
| San Jose Office |
| Santa Cruz |
| Howard R. Lloyd |
| Labor: Other |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1441 Petition for Removal |
| Plaintiff |
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
116
ORDER GRANTING 109 PLAINTIFFS' MOTION FOR FINAL APPROVAL OF CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT AND 105 MOTION FOR ATTORNEYS' FEES, COSTS, AND SERVICE AWARD. Signed by Judge Beth Labson Freeman on 2/24/2017. (blflc2S, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 2/24/2017)
|
|
Filing
92
ORDER REQUIRING STATUS UPDATE. Signed by Judge Beth Labson Freeman. (blflc2S, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 7/18/2016)
|
|
Filing
70
Order by Hon. Beth Labson Freeman granting 56 Motion to Certify Class. A Class Action is Certified. (blflc3S, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/17/2015)
|
|
Filing
52
ORDER by Judge Beth Labson Freeman denying 49 Motion to Set Aside. (blflc3S, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 9/3/2014)
|
|
Filing
48
ORDER by Magistrate Judge Howard R. Lloyd re 44 Discovery Dispute Joint Report No. 1. (hrllc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 6/10/2014)
|
|
Filing
25
STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER re 24 (MODIFIED BY THE COURT). Signed by Magistrate Judge Howard R. Lloyd on 10/9/2013. (hrllc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 10/9/2013)
|
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 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.
