Concord Transportation, Inc. v. Houser Logistics, Inc. et al
| Concord Transportation, Inc. |
| Houser Transport, Inc., Houser Logistics, Inc., Samuel C Houser and Samuel C. Houser |
| 2:2019cv07453 |
| August 28, 2019 |
| US District Court for the Central District of California |
| Charles F Eick |
| Fernando M Olguin |
| Contract: Other |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1332 |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on August 28, 2019. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 4 CERTIFICATE of Interested Parties filed by Plaintiff Concord Transportation, Inc., identifying Concord Transportation, Inc., Houser Logistics, Inc., a North Carolina Corporation, Houser Transport, Inc., a North Carolina Corporation, Samuel C. Houser, an individual. (Marx, Alexander) |
| Filing 3 CIVIL COVER SHEET filed by Plaintiff Concord Transportation, Inc.. (Marx, Alexander) |
| Filing 2 Request for Clerk to Issue Summons on Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening), #1 filed by Plaintiff Concord Transportation, Inc.. (Attachments: #1 Attachment 1)(Marx, Alexander) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT Receipt No: 0973-24339943 - Fee: $400, filed by Plaintiff Concord Transportation, Inc.. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A - Lease Agreement, #2 Exhibit B - Sublease Agreement) (Attorney Alexander Townley Marx added to party Concord Transportation, Inc.(pty:pla))(Marx, Alexander) |
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.
