Laddi et al v. Soraya Motor Co. et al
| Gursharan Laddi, Harvinder Singh and Jasvir Kaur |
| Soraya Motor Co., Arianna Motor Company Inc., Hooman H Bodaghi, Green River Leasing, Honda of Auburn, Hooman Honda, Hooman Motors Group, Paul Hinshaw Acura, Hooman Acura and American Honda Finance Corporation |
| 2:2017cv00287 |
| February 22, 2017 |
| US District Court for the Western District of Washington |
| Seattle Office |
| King |
| John C Coughenour |
| Other Contract |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1332 |
| 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
84
ORDER granting Defendant American Honda Finance Corporation's 52 Motion for Summary Judgment. The Defendant's motion to strike (Dkt. No. 78 ) is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. The Clerk STRIKES pages 2527 in Docket Number 74 and pages 218 in Docket Number 64 -1. Signed by U.S. District Judge John C Coughenour. (TH)
|
|
Filing
76
MINUTE ORDER RE-NOTING defendants' 53 MOTION for Summary Judgment , defendant's 52 MOTION TO DISMISS FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM Pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6) ; Noting Date 10/10/2017. Reply briefs due 10/10/17 by U.S. District Judge John C Coughenour. (RS)
|
|
Filing
68
MINUTE ORDER amending the briefing schedule re Defendant American Honda Finance Corp.'s 52 Motion to Dismiss; Plaintiff's Brief in Opposition due 9/25/2017; Reply due 10/9/2017; Motion 52 is RENOTED for 10/9/2017; and re: Dealership's 53 Motion for Summary Judgment; Plaintiff's Brief in Opposition due 9/25/2017; Reply due 10/9/2017; Motion 53 is RENOTED for 10/9/2017. Authorized by U.S. District Judge John C Coughenour. (PM)
|
|
Filing
49
MINUTE ORDER denying request for attorney fees as a sanction for Plaintiff's counsel's failure to attend the status conference. (See Dkt. No. 44 .) The order to show cause has been satisfied and is VACATED. Authorized by U.S. District Judge John C Coughenour. (PM)
|
|
Filing
46
MINUTE ORDER terminating Plaintiff Gursharan Laddi's 38 Motion to Dismiss Party; terminating Plaintiff Jasvir Kaur's 39 Motion to Dismiss Party; terminating plaintiffs' 41 Motion to Withdraw as Attorney. Authorized by U.S. District Judge John C Coughenour. (SWT)
|
|
Filing
34
MINUTE ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE Show Cause Response due by 6/15/2017, Status Conference continued to 6/20/2017 at 09:00 AM by U.S. District Judge John C Coughenour. (RS)
|
|
Filing
33
MINUTE ORDER per parties' 32 Stipulation, Plaintiffs may file an amended complaint by 6/9/2017; Answer due three weeks after the filing of the amended complaint. Authorized by U.S. District Judge John C Coughenour. (PM)
|
|
Filing
30
MINUTE ORDER granting the parties' 26 Stipulated motion to seal and the document 17 -2 shall remain sealed. The parties also stipulate that they will withdraw the pending, and not stipulated to, motion to seal (Dkt. No. 24 ). Authorized by U.S. District Judge John C Coughenour. (PM)
|
|
Filing
19
MINUTE ORDER granting the parties' 18 stipulated request to extend the deadline to file a response to the complaint. Defendants' response due 14 days after the Court rules on the pending motion to remand. Authorized by U.S. District Judge John C Coughenour. (PM)
|
|
Filing
14
MINUTE ORDER granting 13 parties stipulated request to extend Defendants deadline to file a response to the complaint. Defendants' response to the first amended complaint is due on 3/22/17. Authorized by U.S. District Judge John C Coughenour. (swt)
|
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 Washington Western 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.
