Sing v. Kimoto

Sing v. Kimoto

Plaintiff:	Cedric Ah Sing
Defendant:	Shari Kimoto
Case Number:	2:2012cv00818
Filed:	April 19, 2012
Court:	US District Court for the District of Arizona
Office:	Phoenix Division Office
County:	Pinal
Presiding Judge:	Mark E Aspey (PS)
Presiding Judge:	G Murray Snow
Nature of Suit:	Civil Rights
Cause of Action:	28 U.S.C. § 1441
Jury Demanded By:	None

Follow case documents by RSS

Available Case Documents

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

Date Filed	Document Text
June 4, 2012	Filing 18 ORDER denying 15 Plaintiff's Motion to Remand to State Court. Plaintiff's federal claims are dismissed with prejudice. Plaintiff's state law claims are dismissed without prejudice. The Clerk must enter a judgment of dismissal of t his action with prejudice that states that the dismissal may count as a "strike" under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). The docket shall reflect that the Court certifies, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) and Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure 24(a)(3)(A), that any appeal of this decision would not be taken in good faith. Signed by Judge G Murray Snow on 6/4/12.(LSP)
April 18, 2012	Filing 11 ORDER Granting Motion To Change Venue re 5 . Signed by JUDGE J. MICHAEL SEABRIGHT on 4/17/12. (gls, )CERTIFICATE OF SERVICEParticipants registered to receive electronic notifications received this document electroni cally at the e-mail address listed on the Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF). Participants not registered to receive electronic notifications were served by first class mail on the date of this docket entry [Transferred from hid on 4/19/2012.]

Date Filed

Document Text

June 4, 2012

Filing 18 ORDER denying 15 Plaintiff's Motion to Remand to State Court. Plaintiff's federal claims are dismissed with prejudice. Plaintiff's state law claims are dismissed without prejudice. The Clerk must enter a judgment of dismissal of t his action with prejudice that states that the dismissal may count as a "strike" under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). The docket shall reflect that the Court certifies, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) and Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure 24(a)(3)(A), that any appeal of this decision would not be taken in good faith. Signed by Judge G Murray Snow on 6/4/12.(LSP)

April 18, 2012

Filing 11 ORDER Granting Motion To Change Venue re 5 . Signed by JUDGE J. MICHAEL SEABRIGHT on 4/17/12. (gls, )CERTIFICATE OF SERVICEParticipants registered to receive electronic notifications received this document electroni cally at the e-mail address listed on the Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF). Participants not registered to receive electronic notifications were served by first class mail on the date of this docket entry [Transferred from hid on 4/19/2012.]

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 Arizona District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Sing v. Kimoto
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Plaintiff: Cedric Ah Sing
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: Shari Kimoto
Represented By:	Courtney Rachel Cloman
Represented By:	Rachel Love
Represented By:	Daniel Patrick Struck
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?