Jayashree Santhos Kumar, et al v. Comforcare Health Care Holdings, In., et al
Sam Gopinathan, Jayashree Santhos Kumar and New Wave Home Care, Inc. |
Comforcare Health Care Holdings, Inc., Does and Stephanie Stephens |
2:2015cv07327 |
September 18, 2015 |
US District Court for the Central District of California |
Jacqueline Chooljian |
John A. Kronstadt |
Contract: Franchise |
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
Document Text |
---|
Filing 26 ORDER GRANTING IN PART SECOND STIPULATION TO CONTINUE THE SCHEDULING CONFERENCE, MOTION TO REMAND, AND MOTION TO DISMISS; AND SETTING ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE RE DISMISSAL by Judge John A. Kronstadt, re Stipulation to Continue, 25 . It is hereby ordered that: The Rule 26(f) Scheduling Conference and the hearings on plaintiffs' motion to remand and defendants' motion to dismiss, currently scheduled for December 7, 2015, are taken off calendar. Dkt. 12, 14. The Court sets an Order to Show C ause re Dismissal for January 11, 2016 at 1:30 p.m. If a dismissal is filed by January 4, 2016, no appearance will be required on January 11, 2016. If a dismissal is not filed, counsel shall file a status report by January 4, 2016, regarding the status of the settlement and whether the motions and scheduling conference need to be placed back on calendar. The report shall not disclose the substantive contents of any settlement discussions between the parties. (bp) |
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.