Marcelo V. Pacheco v. Ford Motor Company et al
| Marcelo V. Pacheco |
| Ford Motor Company and DOES 1 through 10, inclusive |
| 2:2018cv09006 |
| October 18, 2018 |
| US District Court for the Central District of California |
| Alka Sagar |
| Otis D Wright |
| Contract: Other |
| 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Notice of Removal - Breach of Contract |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on June 14, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 57
Joint STIPULATION for Order for Dismissal with Prejudice filed by Plaintiff Marcelo V. Pacheco. (Attachments: #1 Proposed Order Granting Joint Stipulation and Order for Dismissal with Prejudice)(Kalinowski, Daniel)
|
|
Filing 56
ORDER GRANTING IN PART PLAINTIFF'S MOTIONS FOR ATTORNEYS' FEES, COSTS, AND EXPENSES #43 , #44 by Judge Otis D. Wright, II: The Court GRANTS IN PART and DENIES IN PART Plaintiffs Motions for Attorneys' Fees, Costs, and Expenses, and AWARDS the following: 1. $19,051.20 in attorneys' fees to Knight Law Group,2. $19,492.65 in attorneys' fees to Altman Law Group, and 3. $15,128.98 in costs and expenses. Defendant shall render payment within sixty (60) days. (lc) Modified on 3/22/2022 (lc).
|
|
Filing 55
MINUTES (IN CHAMBERS) by Judge Otis D. Wright, II: Order VACATING All Dates & Deadlines and DISMISSING Case WITH PREJUDICE Plaintiffs' Motions for Costs and Attorneys' Fees is currently under submission. (ECF No. 54; Mots., ECF Nos. 43, 44.) Defendant's Offer of Judgment has been accepted and filed, (ECF No. 52-1), and Plaintiffs' Motions encompass all remaining issues raised and relief soughtby these proceedings. The Offer of Judgment indicates that the parties intend to dismiss the case with prejudice. (Not. Acceptance Def. 's Offer J. 2, ECF No. 52.) Accordingly, all remaining dates and deadlines in this case are VACATED. The case is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. A ruling on Plaintiffs' Motions will issue. The Clerk of the Court shall close the case. (Made JS-6. Case Terminated.) (lc)
|
|
Filing 54
The hearing on the MOTION for Attorney Fees #43 ; and MOTION for Costs #44 , scheduled for November 1 2021 at 1:30 P.M., are hereby VACATED and taken off calendar. No appearances are necessary. The matters stands submitted, and will be decided upon without oral argument. An order will issue.THERE IS NO PDF DOCUMENT ASSOCIATED WITH THIS ENTRY. (sce) TEXT ONLY ENTRY
|
|
Filing 53
NOTICE TO FILER OF DEFICIENCIES in Electronically Filed Documents RE: Miscellaneous Document, #52 . The following error(s) was/were found: The filing is the acceptance of Rule 68 Offer of Judgment. However, the formal offer of judgment was not "filed" under its own event ( Offer of Judgment), but only attached as an exhibit therein. Other error(s) with document(s): Note: To assist in a search for correct events, please use the "SEARCH" option for a "key word" to narrow the selection process. In response to this notice, the Court may: (1) order an amended or correct document to be filed; (2) order the document stricken; or (3) take other action as the Court deems appropriate. You need not take any action in response to this notice unless and until the Court directs you to do so. (lc)
|
|
Filing 52
Joint Notice of Acceptance of Defendant Ford Motor Company's Offer of Judgment Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 68 filed by Plaintiff Marcelo V. Pacheco re: Minutes of In Chambers Order/Directive - no proceeding held,,,,,, Set/Reset Deadlines/Hearings,,,,, #47 (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A - Executed Rule 68 Offer of Judgment)(Kalinowski, Daniel)
|
|
Filing 51
REPLY in support of NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION for Attorney Fees , Costs and Expenses #43 filed by Plaintiff Marcelo V. Pacheco. (Attachments: #1 Declaration of Daniel Kalinowski in Support of Plaintiff's Reply)(Kalinowski, Daniel)
|
|
Filing 50
REPLY in support of NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION for Costs against Ford Motor Company #44 filed by Plaintiff Marcelo V. Pacheco. (Attachments: #1 Declaration of Daniel Kalinowski in Support of Plaintiff's Reply)(Kalinowski, Daniel)
|
|
Filing 49
OPPOSITION re: NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION for Costs against Ford Motor Company #44 filed by Defendant Ford Motor Company. (Mortenson, Michael)
|
|
Filing 48
OPPOSITION re: NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION for Attorney Fees , Costs and Expenses #43 filed by Defendant Ford Motor Company. (Attachments: #1 Declaration of M. Mortenson, #2 Exhibit A to Decl. of M. Mortenson, #3 Exhibit B to Decl. of M. Mortenson, #4 Exhibit C to Decl. of M. Mortenson, #5 Exhibit D to Decl. of M. Mortenson, #6 Exhibit E to Decl. of M. Mortenson, #7 Exhibit F to Decl. of M. Mortenson, #8 Exhibit G to Decl. of M. Mortenson, #9 Exhibit H to Decl. of M. Mortenson, #10 Exhibit I to Decl. of M. Mortenson, #11 Exhibit J to Decl. of M. Mortenson)(Mortenson, Michael)
|
|
Filing 47
MINUTE ORDER IN CHAMBERS by Judge Otis D. Wright, II: ORDER to SHOW CAUSE re: FRCP 68 Offer of Judgment and Judgment. The Court received and reviewed the parties' latest Joint Status Report. (10/4/21 Status Report, ECF No. 46). As Plaintiff has filed motions for costs and attorneys' fees, the Court DISCHARGES its September 21, 2021 Minute Order. (ECF No. 42.) Having reviewed the recent filings in this matter, and in anticipation of the upcoming cost and fee motions, the Court ORDERS the parties TO SHOW CAUSE, in writing only, no later than October 19, 2021, by answering the following questions: 1. Plaintiff represents that he accepted Defendant's Federal Rule of Civil Procedure ("Rule") 68 Offer of Judgment on June 29, 2021. (Mot. Atty Fees ii, ECF No. 43.) Do the parties intend to file the offer and acceptance pursuant to Rule 68, and if so, when? If not, why not? 2. What type of judgmentof dismissal, of costs and fees in favor of Plaintiff against Defendant, or otherwisedo the parties request? Without limitation, the Court will consider the filing of a proposed judgment sufficient response to this question. The parties may file a joint statement. If either party elects not to file a joint statement, then each party must file their own statement. No hearing will be held. (lc)
|
|
Filing 46
STATUS REPORT Joint Status Report re: Settlement Status and Dismissal filed by Plaintiff Marcelo V. Pacheco. (Attachments: #1 Proposed Order Granting Joint Status Report re: Settlement Status and Dismissal)(Kalinowski, Daniel)
|
|
Filing 45
NOTICE TO FILER OF DEFICIENCIES in Electronically Filed Documents RE: NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION for Costs against Ford Motor Company #44 , NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION for Attorney Fees , Costs and Expenses #43 . The following error(s) was/were found: both filings refer to filer as prevailing party. However clerk unable to locate on case docket, formal filing of the Offer of Rule 68 nor its Notice of acceptance as referenced in the motions and re notice of settlement. Other error(s) with document(s): Since there is no judgment, filings appear to be premature. In response to this notice, the Court may: (1) order an amended or correct document to be filed; (2) order the document stricken; or (3) take other action as the Court deems appropriate. You need not take any action in response to this notice unless and until the Court directs you to do so. (lc)
|
|
Filing 44
NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION for Costs against Ford Motor Company filed by Plaintiff Marcelo V. Pacheco. Motion set for hearing on 11/1/2021 at 01:30 PM before Judge Otis D. Wright II. (Attachments: #1 Memorandum of Points and Authorities in Support of Motion for Costs and Expenses Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 54(D), #2 Declaration of Steve Mikhov in Support of Motion for Costs and Expenses Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 54(D)) (Mikhov, Steve)
|
|
Filing 43
NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION for Attorney Fees , Costs and Expenses filed by Plaintiff Marcelo V. Pacheco. Motion set for hearing on 11/1/2021 at 01:30 PM before Judge Otis D. Wright II. (Attachments: #1 Memorandum of Points and Authorities in Support of Motion for Attorney's Fees, Costs and Expenses, #2 Declaration of Steve Mikhov in Support of Plaintiff's Motion for Attorney's Fees, Costs and Expenses, #3 Declaration of Bryan C. Altman in Support of Plaintiff's Motion for Attorneys' Fees, Costs and Expenses) (Mikhov, Steve)
|
|
Filing 42
MINUTE ORDER IN CHAMBERS by Judge Otis D. Wright, II: The Court received and reviewed the parties' Joint Status Report in Response to the Court's Order to Show Cause #41 . The Court's Order to Show Cause is hereby DISCHARGED #39 . The parties request for continuance is GRANTED. The parties' deadline to file FRCP 41 dismissal documents is October 4, 2021. (lc)
|
|
Filing 41
STATUS REPORT Joint Status Report in Response to Order to Show Cause Regarding Why This Action Should Not Be Dismissed or, Alternatively, Request for Dismissal and Retention of Jurisdiction filed by Plaintiff Marcelo V. Pacheco. (Attachments: #1 Proposed Order Granting Joint Status Report in Response to Order to Show Cause Regarding Why This Action Should Not Be Dismissed or, Alternatively, Request for Dismissal and Retention of Jurisdiction)(Kalinowski, Daniel)
|
|
Filing 40
Notice of Appearance or Withdrawal of Counsel: for attorney Daniel Max Kalinowski counsel for Plaintiff Marcelo V. Pacheco. Adding Daniel Kalinowski as counsel of record for Marcelo V. Pacheco for the reason indicated in the G-123 Notice. Filed by Plaintiff Marcelo V. Pacheco. (Attorney Daniel Max Kalinowski added to party Marcelo V. Pacheco(pty:pla))(Kalinowski, Daniel)
|
|
Filing 39
MINUTE ORDER IN CHAMBERS by Judge Otis D. Wright, II: MINUTE ORDER IN CHAMBERS by Judge Otis D. Wright, II: The Court DISCHARGES the August 26, 2021 Order to Show Cause. (ECF No. 37.) The parties are ORDERED TO SHOW CAUSE, in writing only, no later than September 20, 2021, why this action should not be dismissed. The Court will consider the filing of a Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41 dismissal notice or a noticed fee motion as sufficient response to this OSC. Otherwise, the Court will dismiss the case without further notice. (lc)
|
|
Filing 38
STATUS REPORT Joint Status Report in Response to Order to Show Cause Regarding Dismissal and the Status of Settlement filed by Plaintiff Marcelo V. Pacheco. (Attachments: #1 Proposed Order Granting Joint Status Report in Response to Order to Show Cause Regarding Dismissal and the Status of Settlement)(Colon, Maite)
|
|
Filing 37
MINUTE ORDER IN CHAMBERS by Judge Otis D. Wright, II: On August 23, 2021, the parties filed a Status Report seeking an additional 60 days to file dismissal documents #36 . This second Status Report also indicates that "the subject vehicle has not been surrendered." The second Status Report is substantially similar to the first Status Report, such that it is unclear what progress, if any, was made between the filing of the first Status Report (July 8, 2021) and the filing of the second (August 23, 2021). In light of this observation, the repeated assertion that the vehicle has not been surrendered, without more specificity about the nature of the delay, does not constitute good cause forcontinuing the deadline again. Nor is the pending issue of attorneys' fees, in and of itself, good cause to continue the deadline again. If there is no agreement on attorneys' fees by now, Plaintiff should proceed to make his attorney fee motion without further delay. Accordingly, the parties are ORDERED TO SHOW CAUSE, in writing only, no later than September 9, 2021, why this action should not be dismissed. The Court will consider the filing of a Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41 dismissal notice or a noticed fee motion as sufficient response to this OSC. If a dismissal notice or a fee motion is not forthcoming, the parties' response should demonstrate in a clear and complete manner that good cause exists to keep this case open. Failure to timely comply with this order will result in the dismissal of this action without further warning. (lc)
|
|
Filing 36
STATUS REPORT Joint Status Report Regarding the Status of Settlement filed by Plaintiff Marcelo V. Pacheco. (Attachments: #1 Proposed Order Granting Joint Status Report Regarding the Status of Settlement)(Mikhov, Steve)
|
|
Filing 35
MINUTE ORDER IN CHAMBERS by Judge Otis D. Wright, II: Re status report #34 , The parties seek an additional 75 days to file dismissal documents. That seems a bit excessive. In light of the Status Report, the deadline to file a dismissal that complies with Rule 41 is hereby CONTINUED to August 23, 2021. Failure to timely comply with this order will likely result in the dismissal of this action without further warning. (lc) Modified on 7/9/2021 (lc).
|
|
Filing 34
STATUS REPORT Joint Status Report Regarding the Status of Settlement filed by Plaintiff Marcelo V. Pacheco. (Attachments: #1 Proposed Order)(Mikhov, Steve)
|
|
Filing 33
MINUTE ORDER IN CHAMBERS by Judge Otis D. Wright, II: In light of Plaintiff's Notice of Settlement #32 , indicating that the case has settled in its entirety, this action is placed on inactive status. By July 9, 2021, the parties shall file a dismissal that complies with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41. Failure to timely comply with this order shall result in the dismissal of this action. All dates and deadlines in this action are VACATED and taken off calendar. (lc)
|
|
Filing 32
NOTICE of Settlement filed by Plaintiff Marcelo V. Pacheco. (Altman, Bryan)
|
|
Filing 31
MINUTE ORDER IN CHAMBERS by Judge Otis D. Wright, II: RE Chief Judge issuedGeneral Order No. 21-07 providing that jury trials will be permitted to resume beginning June 7, 2021 and COVID-19 safety protocols, a limited numberof jury trials will be permitted to proceed at one time. Accordingly, the Court hereby ORDERS the listed dates and deadlines in this action are CONTINUED as follows: Final Pretrial Conference set for 4/4/2022 01:30 PM; Motion in Limine set for hearing on 4/18/2022 at 01:30 PM ;Jury Trial set for 4/26/2022 09:00 AM (SEE DOCUMENT FOR ALL SPECIFIED DEADLINES). Additionally, the parties are in violation of a previous scheduling order which required the parties to file the following pretrial documents by June 16, 2021: Proposed Pretrial Conference Order; Memoranda and Contentions of Fact and Law; Joint Witness List; Joint Exhibit List and Exhibit Stipulation Proposed Verdict Form(s) Proposed Jury Instructions / Disputed Jury Instructions; Proposed Voir Dire Questions; Joint Statement of the Case; Joint Status Report re: Settlement. The parties are once again ORDERED to file these documents on or before 3/28/2022. Failure to comply with Court orders may constitute grounds for dismissal of this action. (lc)
|
|
Filing 30
Notice of Appearance or Withdrawal of Counsel: for attorney Patricia H Jun counsel for Defendant Ford Motor Company. Adding Patricia H. Jun as counsel of record for Ford Motor Company for the reason indicated in the G-123 Notice. Filed by Defendant Ford Motor Company. (Attorney Patricia H Jun added to party Ford Motor Company(pty:dft))(Jun, Patricia)
|
|
Filing 29
MINUTE ORDER IN CHAMBERS by Judge Otis D. Wright, II: Having considered the parties' joint stipulation #27 and good cause appearing therefor, the expert discovery cutoff in the above-captioned action is hereby CONTINUED to May 17, 2021. (lc)
|
|
Filing 28
NOTICE TO FILER OF DEFICIENCIES in Electronically Filed Documents RE: ONLY THE PROPOSED Order attached to the Stipulation to Extend Discovery Cut-Off Date[27-1]. The following error(s) was/were found: L.R. 58-10 at least 2 lines of text must accompany the Signature Line for Signature of Judge on a last page of proposed order In response to this notice, the Court may: (1) order an amended or correct document to be filed; (2) order the document stricken; or (3) take other action as the Court deems appropriate. You need not take any action in response to this notice unless and until the Court directs you to do so. (lc)
|
|
Filing 27
Joint STIPULATION to Extend Discovery Cut-Off Date to 05/17/2021 filed by defendant Ford Motor Company. (Attachments: #1 Proposed Order)(Mortenson, Michael)
|
|
Filing 26
ORDER GRANTING JOINT STIPULATION TO CONTINUE TRIAL AND OTHER RELATED DATES #25 by Judge Otis D. Wright, II: Final Pretrial Conference set for 6/28/2021 01:30 PM; Motion in Limine set for hearing on 7/26/2021 at 01:30 PM; Jury Trial set for 8/31/2021 09:00 AM ( SEE DOCUMENT FOR ALL SPECIFIED DEADLINES). (lc)
|
|
Filing 25
STIPULATION to Continue Trial and Other Related dates from May 4, 2021 to August 23, 2021 filed by Plaintiff Marcelo V. Pacheco. (Attachments: #1 Proposed Order)(Altman, Bryan)
|
|
Filing 24
STATUS REPORT Joint Status Report Regarding the Status of Mediation filed by Plaintiff Marcelo V. Pacheco. (Mikhov, Steve)
|
|
Filing 23
ORDER GRANTING JOINT STIPULATION TO CONTINUE DEADLINE FOR VEHICLE INSPECTION AND EXPERT DISCOVERY DEPOSITIONS TO MARCH 10, 2021 #22 by Judge Otis D. Wright, II (lc)
|
|
Filing 22
STIPULATION to Continue DEADLINE FOR VEHICLE INSPECTION AND EXPERT DISCOVERY DEPOSITIONS from 1/15/2021 to 3/10/2021 filed by DEFENDANT Ford Motor Company. (Attachments: #1 Proposed Order)(Taggart, Craig)
|
|
Filing 21
ORDER GRANTING JOINT STIPULATION TO CONTINUE DATES #20 by Judge Otis D. Wright, II: Final Pretrial Conference continued to April 5, 2021 1:30 PM; Hearing on Motions in Limine continued to April 26, 2021 1:30 PM ; Jury Trial continued to May 4, 2021 9:00 AM (SEE DOCUMENT FOR ALL SPECIFIED DEADLINES). (lc)
|
|
Filing 20
NOTICE OF ERRATA filed by Defendant Ford Motor Company. correcting Stipulation to Continue, #19 (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A - Corrected Joint Stipulation to Continue Trial and Discovery Cut-Off)(Taggart, Craig)
|
|
Filing 19
Joint STIPULATION to Continue Trial Date from February 2, 2021 to May 4, 2021 filed by Defendant Ford Motor Company. (Attachments: #1 Declaration of Craig A. Taggart, #2 Declaration of Daniel Kalinowski, #3 Proposed Order)(Taggart, Craig)
|
|
Filing 18
NOTICE of Association of Counsel associating attorney Bryan C. Altman on behalf of Plaintiff Marcelo V. Pacheco. Filed by Plaintiff Marcelo V. Pacheco (Attorney Bryan C Altman added to party Marcelo V. Pacheco(pty:pla))(Altman, Bryan)
|
|
Filing 17
ORDER/REFERRAL to ADR Procedure No 3 by Judge Otis D. Wright, II. Case ordered to a private mediator based upon a stipulation of the parties or by the court order. (lc)
|
|
Filing 16
SCHEDULING AND CASE MANAGEMENT ORDER (JURY TRIALS) by Judge Otis D Wright II: THE SCHEDULING CONFERENCE IS VACATED. SEE THE LAST PAGE OF THIS ORDER FOR THE SPECIFIED DATES. Jury trial: 2/2/21 9:00 AM; File final trial exhibit stipulation: 1/28/21 ; hearing on motions in limine: 1/25/21 1:30 PM; Deadline to file oppositions to motions in limine: 1/11/21; Final Pretrial Conference: 1/4/21 1:30 PM; file motions in limine: 1/4/21; deadline to File Proposed Pretrial Conference Order, Memoranda and Contentions of Fact and Law, Joint Witness List, Joint Exhibit List and Exhibit Stipulation, Proposed Verdict Form(s), Proposed Jury Instructions / Disputed Jury Instructions, Proposed Voir Dire Questions, Joint Statement of the Case, Joint Status Report re: Settlement: 12/28/20; Deadline for hearing motions: 11/23/20; Deadline to conduct settlement conference: 11/16/20; expert discovery cutoff: 10/19/20; percipient/fact discovery cutoff: 10/5/20; last date to amend pleadings or add parties: 2/10/20. (lc)
|
|
Filing 15
STATUS REPORT filed by Plaintiff Marcelo V. Pacheco. (Colon, Maite)
|
|
Filing 14
Notice of Appearance or Withdrawal of Counsel: for attorney Maite Christine Colon counsel for Plaintiff Marcelo V. Pacheco. Adding Maite Colon as counsel of record for Plaintiff for the reason indicated in the G-123 Notice. Filed by Plaintiff Marcelo V. Pacheco. (Attorney Maite Christine Colon added to party Marcelo V. Pacheco(pty:pla))(Colon, Maite)
|
|
Filing 13
ORDER that the Scheduling Conference is set for 11/18/19 1:30 PM ; compliance with FRCP 16, and 26(f) and filing of joint report; Counsel for plaintiff shall immediately serve this Order on all parties, including any new parties to the action by Judge Otis D Wright, II (lc)
|
|
Filing 12
NOTICE of Change of Attorney Business or Contact Information: for attorney Michael Donn Mortenson counsel for Defendant Ford Motor Company. Changing firm name to Mortenson Taggart LLP. Changing e-mail to mmortenson@mortensontaggart.com. Filed by Defendant Ford Motor Company. (Mortenson, Michael)
|
|
Filing 11
NOTICE of Change of Attorney Business or Contact Information: for attorney Craig A Taggart counsel for Defendant Ford Motor Company. Changing firm name to Mortenson Taggart LLP. Changing e-mail to ctaggart@mortensontaggart.com. Filed by Defendant Ford Motor Company. (Taggart, Craig)
|
|
Filing 10
MINUTE ORDER IN CHAMBERS by Judge Otis D Wright, II: This action has been assigned to the calendar of Judge Otis D. Wright II. Counsel are STRONGLY encouraged to review the Central Districts website for additional information. (SEE DOCUMENT FOR SPECIFIC FILING REQUIREMENTS AND INFORMATION; PLEASE refer to Local Rule 79-5 for the submission of CIVIL ONLY SEALED DOCUMENTS. CRIMINAL SEALED DOCUMENTS will remain the same. all proposed sealed documents must be submitted via e-mail to the Judges Chambers email address, EXCLUDING those submitted by pro se parties and IN CAMERA filings, which shall continue to comply with Local Rule 79-5.1. Please refer to the Judges procedures and schedules for detailed instructions for submission of sealed documents. (jp)
|
|
Filing 9
ORDER RE TRANSFER PURSUANT TO GENERAL ORDER 16-05 (Related Case) filed. Transfer of case declined by Judge Andre Birotte Jr, for the reasons set forth on this order. Related Case No. 2:18-ml-02814 AB(FFMx) (rn)
|
|
Filing 8
Notice of Electronic Filing re Notice of Assignment to United States Judges(CV-18) - optional html form #6 , Answer to Complaint (Discovery), Civil Cover Sheet (CV-71) #2 , Notice of Removal (Attorney Civil Case Opening), #1 , Complaint - (Discovery), Notice to Parties of Court-Directed ADR Program (ADR-8) - optional html form #7 , Errata #4 , Civil Cover Sheet (CV-71) #5 , Certificate/Notice of Interested Parties #3 e-mailed to Steve Mikhov bounced due to invalid email address. Primary e-mail address corrected. Notice of Electronic Filing resent addressed to stevem@knightlaw.com. Pursuant to Local Rules it is the attorneys obligation to maintain all personal contact information including e-mail address in the CM/ECF system. THERE IS NO PDF DOCUMENT ASSOCIATED WITH THIS ENTRY. (rrey) TEXT ONLY ENTRY
|
|
Filing 7
NOTICE TO PARTIES OF COURT-DIRECTED ADR PROGRAM filed. (car)
|
|
Filing 6
NOTICE OF ASSIGNMENT to District Judge Otis D. Wright, II and Magistrate Judge Alka Sagar. (car)
|
|
Filing 5
AMENDED CIVIL COVER SHEET filed by Defendant Ford Motor Company. (Mortenson, Michael)
|
|
Filing 4
NOTICE OF ERRATA filed by Defendant Ford Motor Company. correcting Civil Cover Sheet (CV-71) #2 (Mortenson, Michael)
|
|
NON-CONFORMED COPY OF ANSWER to Complaint - (Discovery) with JURY DEMAND filed by Defendant Ford Motor Company. Submitted with Exhibit B to Notice of Removal #1 (car)
|
|
CONFORMED COPY OF COMPLAINT against Defendants Does 1 through 10, inclusive, Ford Motor Company. Jury Demanded, filed by plaintiff Marcelo V. Pacheco. Filed in State Court on 9/17/18 Submitted with Exhibit A to Notice of Removal #1 (car)
|
|
Filing 3
Certification and NOTICE of Interested Parties filed by Defendant Ford Motor Company, (Mortenson, Michael)
|
|
Filing 2
CIVIL COVER SHEET filed by Defendant Ford Motor Company. (Mortenson, Michael)
|
|
Filing 1
NOTICE OF REMOVAL from Los Angeles Superior Court, case number BC722064 Receipt No: 0973-22605182 - Fee: $400, filed by Defendant Ford Motor Company. (Attachments: #1 Declaration of Michael Mortenson in Support of Notice of Removal) (Attorney Michael Donn Mortenson added to party Ford Motor Company(pty:dft))(Mortenson, Michael)
|
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.
