Maria Estela Lopez Carrillo v. Walmart Inc. et al
| Maria Estela Lopez Carrillo |
| Walmart Inc., DOES and Does 1 to 50, inclusive |
| 2:2019cv08729 |
| October 10, 2019 |
| US District Court for the Central District of California |
| Andre Birotte |
| Alicia G Rosenberg |
| P.I.: Other |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1441 |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on November 5, 2019. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 10
ORDER SETTING SCHEDULING CONFERENCE by Judge Andre Birotte Jr. Scheduling Conference set for 3/20/2020 at 10:00 AM before Judge Andre Birotte Jr. (cb)
|
| Filing 9 NOTICE of Association of Counsel associating attorney K. TOM KOHAN on behalf of Plaintiff Maria Estela Lopez Carrillo. Filed by Plaintiff Maria Estela Lopez Carrillo (Kohan, K) |
| Filing 8 NOTICE of Appearance filed by attorney K Tom Kohan on behalf of Plaintiff Maria Estela Lopez Carrillo (Attorney K Tom Kohan added to party Maria Estela Lopez Carrillo(pty:pla))(Kohan, K) |
|
Filing 7
STANDING ORDER upon filing of the complaint by Judge Andre Birotte Jr. (cb)
|
|
Filing 6
ORDER RETURNING CASE FOR REASSIGNMENT by Judge Christina A. Snyder. ORDER case returned to the Clerk for random reassignment pursuant to General Order 19-03. Case randomly reassigned from Judge Christina A. Snyder to Judge Andre Birotte Jr for all further proceedings. The case number will now reflect the initials of the transferee Judge 2:19-cv-08729 AB(AGRx). (rn)
|
| Filing 5 NOTICE TO PARTIES OF COURT-DIRECTED ADR PROGRAM filed. (lh) |
| Filing 4 NOTICE OF ASSIGNMENT to District Judge Christina A. Snyder and Magistrate Judge Alicia G. Rosenberg. (lh) |
| CONFORMED FILED COPY OF COMPLAINT against Defendants Does 1 to 50, Walmart Inc. Filed by Plaintiff Maria Estela Lopez Carrillo. (FILED IN LOS ANGELES COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT ON 5/23/2019 SUBMITTED ATTACHED TO NOTICE OF REMOVAL #1 ) (lh) |
| PROOF OF SERVICE Executed by Plaintiff Maria Estela Lopez Carrillo, upon Defendant Walmart Inc. served on 6/7/2019, answer due 6/28/2019. Service of the Summons and Complaint were executed upon Albert Delamonte, Registered Agent for Service of Process in compliance with California Code of Civil Procedure by service on a domestic corporation, unincorporated association, or public entity. Original Summons NOT returned. (FILED IN LOS ANGELES COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT ON 6/10/2019 SUBMITTED ATTACHED TO NOTICE OF REMOVAL, DOCUMENT 1-9) (lh) |
| CONFORMED FILED COPY OF ANSWER to Complaint - (Discovery) filed by Defendant Walmart Inc. (FILED IN LOS ANGELES COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT ON 9/20/2019 SUBMITTED ATTACHED TO NOTICE OF REMOVAL, DOCUMENT 1-10)(lh) |
| Filing 3 NOTICE of Interested Parties filed by Defendant Walmart Inc.. (Felton, Justin) |
| Filing 2 CIVIL COVER SHEET filed by Defendant Walmart Inc.. (Felton, Justin) |
| Filing 1 NOTICE OF REMOVAL from Los Angeles County Superior Court, case number 19stcv17954 Receipt No: 0973-24589591 - Fee: $400, filed by defendant Walmart Inc.. (Attachments: #1 Declaration of Justin R. Felton, Esq. ISO Defendant Walmart Inc.'s Notice of Removal, #2 Notice of Lodgment of State Court File, #3 Summons, #4 Complaint, #5 Civil Case Cover Sheet, #6 Notice of Case Assignment, #7 PI General Order, #8 Certificate of Mailing, #9 Proof of Personal Service of Summons, #10 Answer, #11 Certificate of Service) (Attorney Justin Ryan Felton added to party Walmart Inc.(pty:dft))(Felton, Justin) |
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.
