Antonio Fernandez v. J.C. Penney Properties, Inc. et al
| Antonio Fernandez |
| Does 1-10, J. C. Penney Company, Inc. and J.C. Penney Properties, Inc. |
| 2:2019cv10401 |
| December 9, 2019 |
| US District Court for the Central District of California |
| Dolly M Gee |
| Alexander F MacKinnon |
| Civil Rights: Americans with Disabilities - Other |
| 42 U.S.C. § 12101 |
| Defendant |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on January 19, 2020. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 19 PROOF OF SERVICE Executed by Plaintiff Antonio Fernandez, upon Defendant J.C. Penney Properties, Inc. served on 12/18/2019, answer due 1/8/2020. Service of the Summons and Complaint were executed upon Agent for Service of Process: C T CORPORATION SYSTEM - Albert Damonte, Intake Specialist in compliance with California Code of Civil Procedure by personal service.Original Summons returned. (Handy, Russell) |
| Filing 18 PROOF OF SERVICE Executed by Plaintiff Antonio Fernandez, upon Defendant J. C. Penney Company, Inc. served on 12/18/2019, answer due 1/8/2020. Service of the Summons and Complaint were executed upon Agent for Service of Process: C T CORPORATION SYSTEM - Albert Damonte, Intake Specialist in compliance with California Code of Civil Procedure by personal service.Original Summons returned. (Handy, Russell) |
| Filing 17 CERTIFICATE of Interested Parties filed by Defendant J. C. Penney Company, Inc., identifying J.C. Penney Corporation, Inc.. (Hunt, Kathleen) |
| Filing 16 NOTICE TO FILER OF DEFICIENCIES in Electronically Filed Documents RE: Answer to Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening), #14 . The following error(s) was/were found: Local Rule 7.1-1 No Notice of Interested Parties and/or no copies. 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. (gk) |
| Filing 15 SCHEDULING MEETING OF COUNSEL [Fed. R. Civ. P. 16, 26(f)] by Judge Dolly M. Gee. Rule 26 Meeting Report due by 2/7/2020. Scheduling Conference set for 2/21/2020 at 9:30 a.m. (See order for details.) (kti) |
| Filing 14 ANSWER to Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening) #1 with JURY DEMAND filed by Defendant J. C. Penney Company, Inc., J.C. Penney Properties, Inc..(Attorney Kathleen Anne Hunt added to party J. C. Penney Company, Inc.(pty:dft), Attorney Kathleen Anne Hunt added to party J.C. Penney Properties, Inc.(pty:dft))(Hunt, Kathleen) |
Filing 13
MINUTES OF IN CHAMBERS - ORDER DECLINING TO EXERCISE SUPPLEMENTAL JURISDICTION OVER PLAINTIFF'S STATE LAW CLAIM by Judge Dolly M. Gee: The Court ordered Plaintiff to show cause in writing why the Court should exercise supplemental jurisdiction over the Unruh Act claim asserted in the Complaint #10 . The Court has reviewed and considered Plaintiff's response to the Court's Order to Show Cause #11 . The Court, in its discretion, declines to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over Plaintiff's Unruh Act claim. The Court therefore dismisses the state law claim without prejudice. Court Reporter: Not Reported. (gk)
|
| Filing 12 NOTICE OF LODGING filed re Response #11 (Attachments: #1 Proof of service)(Seabock, Amanda) |
| Filing 11 RESPONSE filed by Plaintiff Antonio Fernandezto Minutes of In Chambers Order/Directive - no proceeding held,,, #10 (Attachments: #1 Declaration, #2 Declaration, #3 Exhibit 1, #4 Exhibit 2)(Handy, Russell) |
|
Filing 10
MINUTES OF IN CHAMBERS - ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY THE COURT SHOULD NOT DECLINE TO EXERCISE SUPPLEMENTAL JURISDICTION OVER PLAINTIFF'S STATE LAW CLAIM by Judge Dolly M. Gee: The Court orders Plaintiff to show cause in writing why the Court should exercise supplemental jurisdiction over the Unruh Act claim. In responding to this Order to Show Cause, Plaintiff shall identify the amount of statutory damages Plaintiff seeks to recover. Plaintiff shall file a Response to this Order to Show Cause within ten days of the date of this Order. Failure to timely or adequately respond to this Order to Show Cause may, without further warning, result in the Court declining to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over the Unruh Act claim and the dismissal of any such claim pursuant to 28 U.S.C. section 1367(c). Court Reporter: Not Reported. (gk)
|
| Filing 9 Notice to Parties: ADA Disability Access Litigation. (kti) |
|
Filing 8
INITIAL STANDING ORDER upon filing of the complaint by Judge Dolly M. Gee. (kti)
|
| Filing 7 21 DAY Summons Issued re Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening) #1 as to Defendants J. C. Penney Company, Inc., J.C. Penney Properties, Inc.. (jtil) |
| Filing 6 NOTICE TO PARTIES OF COURT-DIRECTED ADR PROGRAM filed. (jtil) |
| Filing 5 NOTICE OF ASSIGNMENT to District Judge Dolly M. Gee and Magistrate Judge Alexander F. MacKinnon. (jtil) |
| Filing 4 Request for Clerk to Issue Summons on Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening) #1 filed by plaintiff Antonio Fernandez. (Handy, Russell) |
| Filing 3 CERTIFICATE of Interested Parties filed by Plaintiff Antonio Fernandez, (Handy, Russell) |
| Filing 2 CIVIL COVER SHEET filed by Plaintiff Antonio Fernandez. (Handy, Russell) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT Receipt No: 0973-24914562 - Fee: $400, filed by plaintiff Antonio Fernandez. (Attorney Russell C Handy added to party Antonio Fernandez(pty:pla))(Handy, Russell) |
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.
