Tiffany Burton et al v. Nutribullet, L.L.C., et al
| Charles Burton and Tiffany Burton |
| Does and Nutribullet, L.L.C. |
| 2:2017cv03358 |
| May 3, 2017 |
| US District Court for the Central District of California |
| Dolly M. Gee |
| Alexander F. MacKinnon |
| Tort Product Liability |
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
154
ORDER RE STIPULATION OF DISMISSAL, 153 by Judge Dean D. Pregerson: Pursuant to the stipulation of the parties under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1)(ii), it is ordered that this action be, and hereby is, dismissedwith prejudice as to all claims, causes of action, and parties, with each partybearing that partys own attorneys fees and costs. The clerk is directed to close the file. Case Terminated. Made JS-6. (shb)
|
|
Filing
126
PROTECTIVE ORDER by Judge Dean D. Pregerson. See order for details. (shb)
|
|
Filing
78
STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER by Magistrate Judge Alexander F. MacKinnon. 77 (sbou)
|
|
Filing
35
MINUTE (IN CHAMBERS) - ORDER RE PLAINTIFFS' RESPONSE TO ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE by Judge Dolly M. Gee. Plaintiffs are ORDERED TO SHOW CAUSE in writing by October 23, 2017 why this action should not be dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. In order to be deemed adequate, Plaintiffs' response will need to provide the citizenship of each of Defendant Nutribullet, L.L.C.'s owners and/or members. (iv)
|
|
Filing
32
MINUTE (IN CHAMBERS)- ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY THIS ACTION SHOULD NOT BE DISMISSED FOR LACK OF SUBJECT MATTER JURISDICTION by Judge Dolly M. Gee. On May 3 2017, Plaintiffs Tiffany Burton and Charles Burton filed a Complaint in this Court against Def endant Nutribullet, L.L.C. Plaintiffs assert subject matter jurisdiction based on diversity of citizenship, 28 U.S.C. Accordingly, the Complaint fails to establish that complete diversity of citizenship exists. In light of the foregoing, Plaintiffs are ORDERED TO SHOW CAUSE in writing by October 12, 2017 why this action should not be dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. (iv)
|
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.
