Armando Robles v. W.L. Montgomery
Petitioner: Armando Robles
Respondent: W. L. Montgomery
Case Number: 2:2017cv08605
Filed: November 28, 2017
Court: US District Court for the Central District of California
Presiding Judge: Dolly M. Gee
Presiding Judge: Alexander F. MacKinnon
Nature of Suit: Other

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed Document Text
June 29, 2018 Opinion or Order Filing 20 JUDGMENT by Judge Andrew J. Guilford, in favor of W. L. Montgomery against Armando Robles Related to: R&R - Accepting Report and Recommendations 19 . IT IS ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the Petition is denied and the action is dismissed with prejudice. (MD JS-6, Case Terminated). (sbou)
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 this case: Armando Robles v. W.L. Montgomery
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Respondent: W. L. Montgomery
Represented By: Stephanie Chu Santoro
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 ]
Petitioner: Armando Robles
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.


Why Is My Information Online?