Deutsche Bank National Trust Company v. Michael Wolff et al
| Deutsche Bank National Trust Company |
| Marian Watson, Naya Reyes, Jeffrey Watson, Does I through X, inclusive, Patricia Weems, Michael Wolff and Joseph Smith |
| 2:2019cv10285 |
| December 4, 2019 |
| US District Court for the Central District of California |
| Jacqueline Chooljian |
| John A Kronstadt |
| Other Fraud |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1441 |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on December 10, 2019. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 10 TRANSMITTAL of documents to Los Angeles County Superior Court. A certified copy of the order of remand and a copy of the docket sheet from this court was sent to Los Angeles County Superior Court - Chatsworth Courthouse. Case number: 19CHUD01228. (jp) |
Filing 9
ORDER RE REQUEST TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS by Judge John A. Kronstadt that the request to Proceed In Forma Pauperis #3 is hereby DENIED. IT IS RECOMMENDED by Magistrate Judge Jacqueline Chooljian for the following reasons: (1) District court lacks jurisdiction; (2) The removed California unlawful detainer action should be remanded sua sponte. (SEE ORDER FOR FURTHER SPECIFICS). IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this case is hereby REMANDED to State Court. (MD JS-6, Case Terminated.) (jp)
|
|
Filing 8
ORDER SETTING RULE 16(b)/26(f) SCHEDULING CONFERENCE by Judge John A. Kronstadt. Counsel shall file a Joint Report consistent with this Order. A hearing is not necessary and, therefore, the matter is taken under submission. Upon review of the Joint Report, a scheduling order will be issued. Rule 26 Meeting Report due by 3/6/2020. (ake)
|
|
Filing 7
STANDING ORDERS FOR CIVIL CASES ASSIGNED TO JUDGE JOHN A. KRONSTADT by Judge John A. Kronstadt. Please read each Order carefully as they differ in some respects from the Local Rules. Counsel are advised that the Court, at any time, may amend one or more of its Standing Orders. It is the responsibility of counsel to refer to this Court's Procedures and Schedules found on the website for the United States District Court, Central District of California (www.cacd.uscourts.gov) to obtain the operative order. The Court thanks the parties and their counsel for their anticipated cooperation in carrying out these requirements. (ake)
|
| RECOMMENDATION issued by Magistrate Judge Jacqueline Chooljian Re REQUEST to Proceed In Forma Pauperis #3 . Proposed Order forwarded to the District Judge for approval.(klg) |
| Filing 6 PROOF OF SERVICE filed by Defendant Patricia Weems, re Notice of Removal, #1 served on 12/3/19. (car) |
| Filing 5 NOTICE TO PARTIES OF COURT-DIRECTED ADR PROGRAM filed. (car) |
| Filing 4 NOTICE OF ASSIGNMENT to District Judge John A. Kronstadt and Magistrate Judge Jacqueline Chooljian. (car) |
| Filing 3 REQUEST to Proceed In Forma Pauperis with Declaration in Support filed by Defendant Patricia Weems. (car) |
| Filing 2 CERTIFICATE of Interested Parties filed by Defendant Patricia Weems, (car) |
| Filing 1 NOTICE OF REMOVAL from Superior Court of CA County of Los Angeles, case number 19CHUD01228 with Conformed copy of summons and complaint. Case assigned to Judge John A. Kronstadt, Discovery to Magistrate Judge Jacqueline Chooljian, filed by Defendant Patricia Weems. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet) (car) |
| NON-CONFORMED COPY OF ANSWER to Complaint Re Notice of Removal, #1 filed by Defendant Patricia Weems Submitted with Exhibit A Pg. 15 to Notice of Removal #1 .(car) |
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.
