Emma Bonaventure v. CMRE Financial Services, Inc.
| Emma Bonaventure |
| CMRE Financial Services, Inc. |
| 2:2019cv00179 |
| January 9, 2019 |
| US District Court for the Central District of California |
| Other Statutory Actions |
| 47 U.S.C. ยง 0227 |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on January 11, 2019. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 5 NOTICE of Interested Parties filed by Plaintiff Emma Bonaventure, identifying Emma Bonaventure; CMRE Financial Services, Inc.. (Terrell, Beth) |
| Filing 4 NOTICE RE INTRA-DISTRICT TRANSFER by Clerk of Court due to incorrect intra-district venue selected by the filer. Case is transferred to the Southern Division. Case has been assigned to Judge Josephine L. Staton for all further proceedings. Any matters that may be referred to a Magistrate Judge are assigned to Douglas F. McCormick. New Case Number 8:19-cv-00055 JLS (DFMx). (lh) |
| Filing 3 Request for Clerk to Issue Summons on Civil Cover Sheet (CV-71) #2 , Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening) #1 filed by Plaintiff Emma Bonaventure. (Terrell, Beth) |
| Filing 2 CIVIL COVER SHEET filed by Plaintiff Emma Bonaventure. (Terrell, Beth) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT Receipt No: 0973-23012301 - Fee: $400, filed by Plaintiff Emma Bonaventure. (Attorney Beth E Terrell added to party Emma Bonaventure(pty:pla))(Terrell, Beth) |
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.
