John Cheung v. Taco Baja, Inc. et al
| JOHN CHEUNG and John Cheng |
| DOES 1 through 10, TACOS BAJA, INC. and TACOS BAJA, INC. doing business as TACOS BAJA ENSENADA |
| 2:2017cv07653 |
| October 19, 2017 |
| US District Court for the Central District of California |
| Consuelo B Marshall |
| Jean P Rosenbluth |
| Civil Rights: Americans with Disabilities - Other |
| 42 U.S.C. § 12101 |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on April 30, 2018. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 18 NOTICE of Voluntary Dismissal filed by Plaintiff John Cheng. Dismissal is Without Prejudice. (Kim, John) |
Filing 17
MINUTE ORDER IN CHAMBERS by Judge Consuelo B. Marshall: If a defendant is not served within 90 days after the complaint is filed, the courton motion or on its own after notice to the plaintiffmust dismiss the action without prejudice against that defendant or order that service be made within a specified time. Fed. R. Civ. P. 9(m). No good cause has been shown for extending the time forservice. Accordingly, Plaintiff is hereby ORDERED to serve Defendant and file proof of service no later than April 30, 2018. No further extensions of time will be granted. A failure to file proof of service by April 30 will result in dismissal of this action without prejudice.(SEE DOCUMENT FOR FURTHER DETAILS) (vv)
|
| Filing 16 RESPONSE filed by Plaintiff John Chengto Minutes of In Chambers Order/Directive - no proceeding held,,, Set/Reset Deadlines/Hearings,, #15 (Kim, John) |
|
Filing 15
MINUTE ORDER IN CHAMBERS - Order To Show Cause Re: Dismissal for Lack of Prosecution by Judge Consuelo B. Marshall: Absent a showing of good cause, an action must be dismissed without prejudice if the summons and complaint are not served on a defendant within 90 days after the complaint is filed. Generally, defendant must answer the complaint within 21 days after service (60 days if the defendant is the United States.) In the present case, it appears that these time periods have not been met. Accordingly, the court, on its own motion, orders plaintiff(s) to show cause in writing on or before April 17, 2018 why this action should not be dismissed for lack of prosecution. (bm)
|
|
Filing 14
MINUTE (IN CHAMBERS)- ORDER VACATING AND DISCHARGING ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE by Judge Consuelo B. Marshall: The Court deems the response #13 satisfactory. Accordingly, the Order to Show Cause Re: Dismissal for Lack of Prosecution [Doc. No. 12] is hereby vacated and discharged. Plaintiff's request for an extension of time to serve the defendant by no later than March 26, 2018 is GRANTED. (jp)
|
| Filing 13 RESPONSE filed by Plaintiff John Chengto Minutes of In Chambers Order/Directive - no proceeding held,,,,, Set/Reset Deadlines,,,, #12 (Attachments: #1 Exhibit)(Kim, John) |
|
Filing 12
MINUTE IN CHAMBERS ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE RE DISMISSAL FOR LACK OF PROSECUTION by Judge Consuelo B. Marshall: The court, on its own motion, orders plaintiff(s) to show cause in writing on or before February 27, 2018 why this action should not be dismissed for lack of prosecution. As an alternative to a written response by plaintiff(s), the Court will consider the filing of one of the following, as an appropriate response to this Order To Show Cause, on or before the above date, as evidence that the matter is being prosecuted diligently: Proof(s) of service of summons and complaint on the defendant(s, An Answer by the Defendant(s). It is plaintiff's responsibility to respond promptly to all Orders and to prosecute the action diligently, including filing proofs of service and stipulations extending time to respond. If necessary, plaintiff(s) must also pursue Rule 55 remedies promptly upon the default of any defendant. All stipulations affecting the progress of the case must be approved by thisCourt. (Local Rules 7-1 and 7-2). (shb)
|
|
Filing 11
MINUTE ORDER IN CHAMBERS by Judge Consuelo B. Marshall: re: Minutes of In Chambers Order to Show Cause, #9 , Response to OSC #10 . In light of Plaintiffs concession, the Court DISMISSES WITHOUT PREJUDICE the third, fourth, and fifth causes of action, on the basis that they substantially predominate over the claim over which the Court has original jurisdiction. The Court will not at this time exercise its discretion to decline supplemental jurisdiction over the second cause of action for violations of Californias Unruh Civil Rights Act. The Court may revisit this issue if it becomes apparent that Plaintiffs second cause of action will substantially predominate over Plaintiffs first cause of action for violations of the Americans with Disabilities Act. (shb)
|
| Filing 10 RESPONSE filed by Plaintiff John Chengto Minutes of In Chambers Order/Directive - no proceeding held,, Set/Reset Deadlines, #9 (Kim, John) |
|
Filing 9
MINUTE ORDER IN CHAMBERS by Judge Consuelo B. Marshall: Plaintiff is ORDERED TO SHOW CAUSE, in writing, no later than December 1, 2017, why the Court should not decline to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over his Second, Third, Fourth, and Fifth Causes of Action, on the grounds that Plaintiffs state claimssubstantially predominate in this case and on the grounds that his Unruh claim presents a novel and difficult question of state law. See order for further details. (shb)
|
| Filing 8 STANDING ORDER: READ THIS ORDER CAREFULLY. IT CONTROLS THIS CASEAND MAY DIFFER IN SOME RESPECTS FROM THE LOCAL RULES. This action has been assigned to the calendar of Honorable Consuelo B. Marshall. Both the Court and the attorneys bear responsibility for the progress of litigation in thethis Court. To secure the just, speedy, and inexpensive determination of every action, all counsel are ordered to familiarize themselves with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and the Local Rules of the Central District of California.1\ FED.R.CIV.P 1. NONCOMPLIANCE MAY LEAD TO THE IMPOSITION OF SANCTIONS, INCLUDING THE STRIKING OF PLEADINGS AND ENTRY OF JUDGMENT OR DISMISSAL OF THE ACTION. See order for further details. (shb) |
| Filing 7 Notice to Parties: ADA Disability Access Litigation. (shb) |
| Filing 6 21 DAY Summons Issued re Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening) #1 as to Defendant Tacos Baja, Inc. (ghap) |
| Filing 5 NOTICE OF ASSIGNMENT to District Judge Consuelo B. Marshall and Magistrate Judge Jean P. Rosenbluth. (ghap) |
| Filing 4 NOTICE of Interested Parties filed by Plaintiff JOHN CHEUNG, (Kim, John) |
| Filing 3 CIVIL COVER SHEET filed by Plaintiff JOHN CHEUNG. (Kim, John) |
| Filing 2 Request for Clerk to Issue Summons on Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening) #1 filed by Plaintiff JOHN CHEUNG. (Kim, John) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT Receipt No: 0973-20689223 - Fee: $400, filed by Plaintiff JOHN CHEUNG. (Attorney John Yunhwan Kim added to party JOHN CHEUNG(pty:pla))(Kim, John) |
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 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.
