C. M. Klobnock v. The City of Los Angeles et al
| C. M. Klobnock |
| The City of Los Angeles, Howard Sommers Towing and The Los Angeles Police Department |
| 2:2010cv02627 |
| April 9, 2010 |
| US District Court for the Central District of California |
| Dolly M. Gee |
| Patrick J. Walsh |
| Civil Rights: Other |
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
109
JUDGMENT by Judge Dolly M. Gee, Pursuant to the Order Accepting Report and Adopting Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendations of United States Magistrate Judge, IT IS ADJUDGED that the action is dismissed with prejudice, 108 . (MD JS-6, Case Terminated). (ca)
|
|
Filing
89
ORDER ACCEPTING REPORT AND ADOPTING FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE by Judge Dolly M. Gee for Report and Recommendation (Issued), 85 . Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636, the Court has reviewed the Second Amended Complaint, the records on file, and the Report and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge. Further, the Court has engaged in a de novo review of those portions of the Report to which Defendant has objected. The Court accepts the findings and recommendation of the Magistrate Judge. (ca)
|
|
Filing
80
MINUTE ORDER to Show Cause (In Chambers) by Magistrate Judge Patrick J. Walsh: On January 9, 2012, Defendant Howard Sommers Towing, Inc. ("HST") filed amotion for judgment on the pleadings. (Docket No. 75.) Plaintiff had until March 10, 201 2 to file his opposition. (Docket No. 76.) As of the date of this Order, Plaintiff has failed to do so. Failure to file an opposition is grounds for dismissal of a case under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b). See Ghazali v. Moran, 46 F.3d 52, (9 th Cir. 1995) (per curiam). The Court will allow Plaintiff one more opportunity to respond. Plaintiff has until April 30, 2012 to file his opposition to Defendant HST's motion for judgment on the pleadings. Plaintiff is warned that failure to file an opposition could result in dismissal of his case under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b). (ca)
|
|
Filing
56
ORDER ACCEPTING REPORT AND ADOPTING FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE by Judge Dolly M. Gee for Report and Recommendation (Final), 55 . Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636, the Court has reviewed the First Am ended Complaint, the records on file, and the Final Report and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge. Further, the Court has engaged in a de novo review of those portions of the Report to which the parties have objected. The Court accepts the findings and recommendation of the Magistrate Judge. (ca)
|
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 Central 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.
