Velasco v. Bodega Latina Corporation et al
| Marisela Velasco |
| Bodega Latina Corporation, Unknown Parties and Bodega Latina Corporation a foreign corporation doing business as El Super |
| 2:2018cv02340 |
| July 25, 2018 |
| US District Court for the District of Arizona |
| Phoenix Division Office |
| Maricopa |
| Roslyn O Silver |
| Personal Injury: Other |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1441 |
| Defendant |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on April 24, 2019. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 5 NOTICE TO PARTY OF DEFICIENCY RE: CORPORATE DISCLOSURE STATEMENT: Pursuant to FRCiv 7.1 and LRCiv 7.1.1 the attached Corporate Disclosure Statement form must be filed by all nongovernmental corporate parties with their first appearance. A supplemental statement must be filed upon any change in the information. In addition, if not already filed, the Corporate Disclosure Statement should be filed within 14 days. Corporate Disclosure Statement Deadline set as to Bodega Latina Corporation. (MFR) |
| Filing 4 NOTICE TO FILER OF DEFICIENCY re: #1 Notice of Removal filed by Bodega Latina Corporation. Pursuant to the Electronic Case Filing Administrative Policies and Procedures Manual Section II(B), attorneys are required to submit a Supplemental Civil Cover Sheet when filing a notice of removal. FOLLOW-UP ACTION REQUIRED: Please refile corrected document. Deficiency must be corrected within one business day of this notice. This is a TEXT ENTRY ONLY. There is no PDF document associated with this entry. (MFR) |
| Filing 3 NOTICE TO THE PARTIES - The Court is participating in the Mandatory Initial Discovery Pilot (MIDP) and this case is subject to that pilot. The key features and deadlines are set forth in the attached Notice which includes General Order 17-08. Also attached is a checklist for use by the parties. All parties must respond to the mandatory initial discovery requests set forth in the General Order before initiating any further discovery in this case. Please note: The discovery obligations in the General Order supersede the disclosures required by Rule 26(a)(1). Any party seeking affirmative relief must serve a copy of the attached documents (Notice to Parties, including General Order 17-08 and MIDP Checklist) on each new party when the Complaint, Counterclaim, Crossclaim, or Third-Party Complaint is served. (MFR) |
| Filing 2 Filing fee paid, receipt number 0970-15768309. This case has been assigned to the Honorable Roslyn O Silver. All future pleadings or documents should bear the correct case number: CV-18-02340-PHX-ROS. Notice of Availability of Magistrate Judge to Exercise Jurisdiction form attached. (MFR) |
| Filing 1 NOTICE OF REMOVAL from Maricopa County Superior Court, case number CV2017-009028. Filing fee received: $ 400.00, receipt number 0970-15768309 filed by Bodega Latina Corporation. (Delinko, Matthew) (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet, #2 Exhibit A, #3 Exhibit B, #4 Affidavit of Matthew E. Delinko, #5 Exhibit A)(MFR) |
| ***STATE COURT RECORD RECEIVED***SERVICE EXECUTED : Certificate of Service re: Summons, Complaint and Certificate Regarding Compulsory Abritration upon URS Agents, LLC on 6/20/2017 (original filed in Maricopa County Superior Court on 6/22/2017). (MFR) This is a TEXT ENTRY ONLY. There is no PDF document associated with this entry. |
| ***STATE COURT RECORD RECEIVED: ANSWER to #1 Notice of Removal by Bodega Latina Corporation. ENTERED IN DISTRICT COURT FOR CASE MANAGEMENT PURPOSES***.(MFR) |
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 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.
