Matthew Farkas v. UBS Financial Services Inc.
| Matthew Farkas |
| UBS Financial Services Inc., Todd Locicero and Does 1 through 100, inclusive |
| 2:2019cv10320 |
| December 5, 2019 |
| US District Court for the Central District of California |
| Jacqueline Chooljian |
| Otis D Wright |
| Civil Rights: Jobs |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1441 |
| Both |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on February 18, 2020. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 11
ORDER that the Scheduling Conference is set for 3/23/20 1:30 PM ; compliance with FRCP 16, and 26(f) and filing of joint report; Counsel for plaintiff shall immediately serve this Order on all parties, including any new parties to the action by Judge Otis D Wright, II (lc)
|
|
Filing 10
MINUTE ORDER IN CHAMBERS by Judge Otis D Wright, II: This action has been assigned to the calendar of Judge Otis D. Wright II. Counsel are STRONGLY encouraged to review the Central Districts website for additional information.The parties may consent to proceed before a Magistrate Judge appearing onthe voluntary consent list. PLEASE refer to Local Rule 79-5 for the submission of CIVIL ONLY SEALED DOCUMENTS. CRIMINAL SEALED DOCUMENTS will remain the same. all proposed sealed documents must be submitted via e-mail to the Judges Chambers email address, EXCLUDING those submitted by pro se parties and IN CAMERA filings, which shall continue to comply with Local Rule 79-5.1. Please refer to the Judges procedures and schedules for detailed instructions for submission of sealed documents (lc)
|
| Filing 9 NOTICE TO PARTIES OF COURT-DIRECTED ADR PROGRAM filed. (lh) |
| Filing 8 NOTICE OF ASSIGNMENT to District Judge Otis D. Wright, II and Magistrate Judge Jacqueline Chooljian. (lh) |
| NON-CONFORMED COPY OF ANSWER to Complaint, filed by Defendant UBS Financial Services Inc. (SUBMITTED ATTACHED TO NOTICE OF REMOVAL #1 )(lh) |
| CONFORMED FILED COPY OF COMPLAINT against Defendants Does 1 through 100, Todd Locicero, UBS Financial Services Inc. Jury Demanded, filed by Plaintiff Matthew Farkas. (FILED IN LOS ANGELES COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT ON 11/14/2019 SUBMITTED ATTACHED TO NOTICE OF REMOVAL #1 ) (lh) |
| Filing 7 PROOF OF SERVICE filed by Defendant UBS Financial Services Inc., re Notice of Removal (Attorney Civil Case Opening),, #1 served on 12/05/2019. (Quinn, Monica) |
| Filing 6 NOTICE of Related Case(s) filed by Defendant UBS Financial Services Inc.. (Quinn, Monica) |
| Filing 5 NOTICE of Interested Parties filed by Defendant UBS Financial Services Inc., (Quinn, Monica) |
| Filing 4 CORPORATE DISCLOSURE STATEMENT filed by Defendant UBS Financial Services Inc. (Quinn, Monica) |
| Filing 3 CIVIL COVER SHEET filed by Defendant UBS Financial Services Inc.. (Quinn, Monica) |
| Filing 2 REQUEST FOR JUDICIAL NOTICE in Support of Defendant's Notice of Removal filed by Defendant UBS Financial Services Inc.. (Quinn, Monica) |
| Filing 1 NOTICE OF REMOVAL from Los Angeles County Superior Court, case number 19STCV41046 Receipt No: 0973-24900687 - Fee: $400, filed by Defendant UBS Financial Services Inc.. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit 1 - Defendant's Answer to Plaintiff's Complaint, #2 Declaration of Quinn in Support of Removal, #3 Exhibit (Ex. A to Quinn Decl. - Complaint), #4 Declaration of Wolfe in Support of Removal, #5 Exhibit (Ex. A to Wolfe Decl.), #6 Declaration of Bird in Support of Removal) (Attorney Monica M Quinn added to party UBS Financial Services Inc.(pty:dft))(Quinn, Monica) |
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.
