Osornio v. Geico
| Angel Osornio |
| Geico |
| 2:2020cv00505 |
| March 10, 2020 |
| US District Court for the District of Arizona |
| Deborah M Fine |
| Contract: Insurance |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1331 |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on May 21, 2020. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 13 MOTION for Reconsideration Regarding Misdemeanor Hit and Run-ARS 28-662 by Angel Osornio. (GMP) |
| Filing 12 MOTION to Appeal Judgment and Rule 60 Relief from Judgment and Order Rule 4 by Angel Osornio. (GMP) |
| Filing 11 MOTION to Appeal Judgment and Rule 60 Relief from Judgment and Order Rule 4 by Angel Osornio. (GMP) |
Filing 10
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION that the Complaint (Doc. #1 ) be dismissed without prejudice. IT IS FURTHER RECOMMENDED that Plaintiff's Motion for Service of the Complaint by the United States Marshals Service (Doc. #3 ) be denied without prejudice. This recommendation is not an order that is immediately appealable to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. Any notice of appeal pursuant to Rule 4(a)(1) of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure should not be filed until entry of the District Court's judgment. The parties shall have fourteen days from the date of service of a copy of this recommendation within which to file specific written objections with the Court. See 28 U.S.C. 636(b)(1); Fed. R. Civ. P. 6, 72. The parties shall have fourteen days within which to file responses to any objections. Failure to file timely objections to the Magistrate Judges Report and Recommendation may result in the acceptance of the Report and Recommendation by the District Court without further review. See United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th Cir. 2003). Failure to file timely objections to any factual determination of the Magistrate Judge may be considered a waiver of a party's right to appellate review of the findings of fact in an order or judgment entered pursuant to the Magistrate Judges recommendation. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 72. See document for complete details. Signed by Magistrate Judge Deborah M Fine on 4/15/2020. (WLP)
|
|
Filing 9
ORDER - IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff's Application to Proceed in District Court Without Prepaying Fees or Costs (Doc. #2 ) is granted. Plaintiff shall be allowed to proceed in this matter without prepayment of costs or fees or the necessity of giving security therefor. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED service of the Complaint by any means may not proceed until further Court Order authorizing service. See document for complete details. Signed by Magistrate Judge Deborah M Fine on 4/14/2020. (WLP)
|
| Filing 8 Agreement to Magistrate Judge Jurisdiction. Party agrees to Magistrate Judge Jurisdiction. This is a TEXT ENTRY ONLY. There is no PDF document associated with this entry. (MAP) |
| Filing 6 NOTICE TO SELF-REPRESENTED LITIGANT re informational documents attached: (1) Notice to Self-Represented Litigant, (2) Federal Court Self-Service Clinic Flyer, (3) Fed. R. Civ. P. 5.2, and (4) Notice and Request re Electronic Noticing. (HLA) |
| Filing 5 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. (HLA) |
| Filing 4 This case has been assigned to the Honorable Deborah M Fine. All future pleadings or documents should bear the correct case number: CV-20-505-PHX-DMF. Magistrate Election form attached. (Attachments: #1 Magistrate Consent Form Instructions)(HLA) |
| Filing 3 MOTION Service by U.S. Marshal's Service by Angel Osornio. (HLA) |
| Filing 2 APPLICATION for Leave to Proceed In Forma Pauperis by Angel Osornio. (HLA) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT filed by Angel Osornio.(HLA) |
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
| Search for this case: Osornio v. Geico | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Defendant: Geico | |
| 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: Angel Osornio | |
| 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.
