Arno Enzerink v. Buzzfeed, Inc. et al
| Arno Enzerink |
| DOES 1 through 10 and Buzzfeed, Inc. |
| 2:2019cv09913 |
| November 19, 2019 |
| US District Court for the Central District of California |
| Charles F Eick |
| Dale S Fischer |
| Copyright |
| 17 U.S.C. ยง 101 |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on June 8, 2020. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 14
ORDER SETTING SCHEDULING CONFERENCE by Judge Dale S. Fischer. The Joint Report must include the completed Schedule of Pretrial and Trial dates. Lead trial counsel are ordered to appear in person unless counsel have been excused by the Court. Scheduling Conference set for 3/23/2020 at 11:00 AM before Judge Dale S. Fischer. (rfi)
|
| Filing 13 NOTICE of Interested Parties filed by Defendant Buzzfeed, Inc., identifying NBCUniversal Media, LLC; Comcast Corp.. (Williams, Jeffrey) |
| Filing 12 ANSWER to Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening) #1 filed by Defendant Buzzfeed, Inc..(Williams, Jeffrey) |
| Filing 11 NOTICE TO FILER OF DEFICIENCIES in Electronically Filed Documents RE: Stipulation Extending Time to Answer (30 days or less), #10 . The following error(s) was/were found: Proposed Document was not submitted as separate attachment. Other error(s) with document(s): No [Prop] Order. [Prop] Order is needed for more than 30 days. 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. (lom) |
| Filing 10 STIPULATION Extending Time to Answer the complaint as to Buzzfeed, Inc. answer now due 1/13/2020, re Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening) #1 filed by Defendant Buzzfeed, Inc..(Attorney Jeffrey N Williams added to party Buzzfeed, Inc.(pty:dft))(Williams, Jeffrey) |
| Filing 9 21 DAY Summons Issued re Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening) #1 as to Defendant Buzzfeed, Inc. (ghap) |
|
Filing 8
STANDING ORDER FOR CASES ASSIGNED TO JUDGE DALE S. FISCHER upon filing of the complaint by Judge Dale S. Fischer. If a party would be entitled to attorneys fees, counsel are referred to the Order Re Fees found on Court's website under Judge Fischer's Procedures and Schedules contained in the Judge's Requirements tab. Read all Orders carefully. They govern this case and differ in some respects from the Local Rules. COUNSEL ARE ORDERED TO PROVIDE A MANDATORY CHAMBERS COPY OF THE COMPLAINT, NOTICE OF REMOVAL, AND ANY OTHER INITIATING DOCUMENTS. (rfi)
|
| Filing 7 NOTICE TO PARTIES OF COURT-DIRECTED ADR PROGRAM filed. (ghap) |
| Filing 6 NOTICE OF ASSIGNMENT to District Judge Dale S. Fischer and Magistrate Judge Charles F. Eick. (ghap) |
| Filing 5 Request for Clerk to Issue Summons on Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening) #1 filed by Plaintiff Arno Enzerink. (Doniger, Stephen) |
| Filing 4 REPORT ON THE FILING OF AN ACTION regarding a copyright (Initial Notification) filed by Arno Enzerink. (Doniger, Stephen) |
| Filing 3 CERTIFICATE of Interested Parties filed by Plaintiff Arno Enzerink, (Doniger, Stephen) |
| Filing 2 CIVIL COVER SHEET filed by Plaintiff Arno Enzerink. (Doniger, Stephen) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT Receipt No: 0973-24812322 - Fee: $400, filed by Plaintiff Arno Enzerink. (Attorney Stephen M Doniger added to party Arno Enzerink (pty:pla))(Doniger, Stephen) |
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.
