Rolex Watch U.S.A., Inc. v. Michael Davidi et al
| Rolex Watch U.S.A., Inc. |
| Ilana Cohanim, Energy Light Service, LLC, Janet Davidi, Pacific Bancorp Inc., Farid Moradi and Michael Davidi |
| 2:2018cv06919 |
| August 13, 2018 |
| US District Court for the Central District of California |
| Percy Anderson |
| Dean D Pregerson |
| Alka Sagar |
| Real Property: Other |
| 28 U.S.C. § 1332 |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on September 6, 2018. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 21 NOTICE of Voluntary Dismissal filed by ROLEX WATCH U.S.A., INC. Rolex Watch U.S.A., Inc.. Dismissal is WITHOUT. (James, Jacqueline) |
Filing 20
ORDER by Judge Percy Anderson: granting #11 Non-Resident Attorney Brian W. Brokate APPLICATION to Appear Pro Hac Vice on behalf of plaintiff Rolex Watch U.S.A. Inc, designating Jacqueline L. James as local counsel. (mrgo)
|
|
Filing 19
STANDING ORDER by Judge Percy Anderson. READ THIS ORDER CAREFULLY. IT CONTROLS THE CASE AND DIFFERS IN SOME RESPECTS FROM THE LOCAL RULES. (mrgo)
|
|
Filing 18
MINUTE ORDER IN CHAMBERS - COURT ORDER by Judge Percy Anderson. Accordingly, the Court dismisses Plaintiff's Complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. A district court may, and should, grant leave to amend when it appears that subject matter jurisdiction may exist, even though the complaint inadequately alleges jurisdiction. See 28 U.S.C. 1653; Trentacosta v. Frontier Pacific Aircraft Industries, Inc., 813 F.2d 1553, 1555 (9th Cir. 1987). Therefore, the Court grants Plaintiff leave to amend the Complaint to establish federal subject matter jurisdiction. Plaintiff's First Amended Complaint, if any, is to be filed by September 10, 2018. The failure to file a First Amended Complaint by that date or to adequately allege the Court's jurisdiction may result in the dismissal of this action without prejudice. (See document for details) (mrgo)
|
|
Filing 17
ORDER RETURNING CASE FOR REASSIGNMENT by Judge Dean D. Pregerson. ORDER case returned to the Clerk for random reassignment pursuant to General Order 16-05. Case randomly reassigned from Judge Dean D. Pregerson to Judge Percy Anderson for all further proceedings. The case number will now reflect the initials of the transferee Judge 2:18-cv-06919 PA(ASx). (rn)
|
|
Filing 16
ORDER RE TRANSFER PURSUANT TO GENERAL ORDER 16-05 (Related Case) filed. Transfer of case declined by Judge S. James Otero, for the reasons set forth on this order. Related Case No. 2:13-cv-09221 SJO(FFMx) (rn)
|
|
Filing 15
ORDER by Judge Dean D. Pregerson: GRANTING #13 Non-Resident Attorney Beth M. Frenchman APPLICATION to Appear Pro Hac Vice on behalf of Plaintiff, Rolex Watch, U.S.A., Inc, designating Jacqueline L. James as local counsel. (shb)
|
|
Filing 14
ORDER by Judge Dean D. Pregerson: GRANTING #12 Non-Resident Attorney Jeffrey E. Dupler APPLICATION to Appear Pro Hac Vice on behalf of Plaintiff, Rolex Watch, U.S.A., Inc, designating Jacqueline L. James as local counsel. (shb)
|
| Filing 13 APPLICATION of Non-Resident Attorney Beth M. Frenchman to Appear Pro Hac Vice on behalf of Plaintiff Rolex Watch U.S.A., Inc. (Pro Hac Vice Fee - $400 Fee Paid, Receipt No. 0973-22267296) filed by Plaintiff Rolex Watch U.S.A., Inc.. (Attachments: #1 Proposed Order) (James, Jacqueline) |
| Filing 12 APPLICATION of Non-Resident Attorney Jeffrey E. Dupler to Appear Pro Hac Vice on behalf of Plaintiff Rolex Watch U.S.A., Inc. (Pro Hac Vice Fee - $400 Fee Paid, Receipt No. 0973-22267166) filed by Plaintiff Rolex Watch U.S.A., Inc.. (Attachments: #1 Proposed Order) (James, Jacqueline) |
| Filing 11 APPLICATION of Non-Resident Attorney Brian W. Brokate to Appear Pro Hac Vice on behalf of Plaintiff Rolex Watch U.S.A., Inc. (Pro Hac Vice Fee - $400 Fee Paid, Receipt No. 0973-22266634) filed by Plaintiff Rolex Watch U.S.A., Inc.. (Attachments: #1 Proposed Order) (James, Jacqueline) |
| Filing 10 NOTICE OF PRO HAC VICE APPLICATION DUE for Non-Resident Attorney Jeffrey E Dupler. A document recently filed in this case lists you as an out-of-state attorney of record. However, the Court has not been able to locate any record that you are admitted to the Bar of this Court, and you have not filed an application to appear Pro Hac Vice in this case. Accordingly, within 5 business days of the date of this notice, you must either (1) have your local counsel file an application to appear Pro Hac Vice (Form G-64) and pay the applicable fee, or (2) complete the next section of this form and return it to the court at cacd_attyadm@cacd.uscourts.gov. You have been removed as counsel of record from the docket in this case, and you will not be added back to the docket until your Pro Hac Vice status has been resolved. (et) |
| Filing 9 NOTICE OF PRO HAC VICE APPLICATION DUE for Non-Resident Attorney Beth M Frenchman. A document recently filed in this case lists you as an out-of-state attorney of record. However, the Court has not been able to locate any record that you are admitted to the Bar of this Court, and you have not filed an application to appear Pro Hac Vice in this case. Accordingly, within 5 business days of the date of this notice, you must either (1) have your local counsel file an application to appear Pro Hac Vice (Form G-64) and pay the applicable fee, or (2) complete the next section of this form and return it to the court at cacd_attyadm@cacd.uscourts.gov. You have been removed as counsel of record from the docket in this case, and you will not be added back to the docket until your Pro Hac Vice status has been resolved. (et) |
| Filing 8 NOTICE OF PRO HAC VICE APPLICATION DUE for Non-Resident Attorney Brian W Brokate. A document recently filed in this case lists you as an out-of-state attorney of record. However, the Court has not been able to locate any record that you are admitted to the Bar of this Court, and you have not filed an application to appear Pro Hac Vice in this case. Accordingly, within 5 business days of the date of this notice, you must either (1) have your local counsel file an application to appear Pro Hac Vice (Form G-64) and pay the applicable fee, or (2) complete the next section of this form and return it to the court at cacd_attyadm@cacd.uscourts.gov. You have been removed as counsel of record from the docket in this case, and you will not be added back to the docket until your Pro Hac Vice status has been resolved. (et) |
| Filing 7 21 DAY Summons Issued re Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening) #1 as to Defendants Ilana Cohanim, Janet Davidi, Michael Davidi, Energy Light Service, LLC, Farid Moradi, Pacific Bancorp Inc. (et) |
| Filing 6 NOTICE TO PARTIES OF COURT-DIRECTED ADR PROGRAM filed. (et) |
| Filing 5 NOTICE OF ASSIGNMENT to District Judge Dean D. Pregerson and Magistrate Judge Alka Sagar. (et) |
| Filing 4 Request for Clerk to Issue Summons on Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening) #1 filed by Plaintiff Rolex Watch U.S.A., Inc.. (James, Jacqueline) |
| Filing 3 NOTICE of Interested Parties filed by Plaintiff, Rolex Watch U.S.A., Inc. Rolex Watch U.S.A., Inc., identifying ROLEX INDUSTRIES INC.. (James, Jacqueline) |
| Filing 2 CIVIL COVER SHEET filed by Plaintiff Rolex Watch U.S.A., Inc.. (James, Jacqueline) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT Receipt No: 0973-22242943 - Fee: $400, filed by Plaintiff Rolex Watch U.S.A., Inc.. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit Exhibits 1-5) (Attorney Jacqueline L James added to party Rolex Watch U.S.A., Inc.(pty:pla))(James, Jacqueline) |
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.
