Esteban Koffsmon v. Green Dot Corporation et al
| Esteban Koffsmon |
| Mark Shifke, Steven W Streit and Green Dot Corporation |
| 2:2019cv10701 |
| December 18, 2019 |
| US District Court for the Central District of California |
| Charles F Eick |
| Dean D Pregerson |
| Securities/Commodities |
| 28 U.S.C. § 1331 |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on January 19, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 18
ORDER RE JOINT STIPULATION TO REVISE CONTINUING DATE UPON WHICH RESPONSIVE PLEADING IS DUE (DKT. NO. 14), by Judge Dean D. Pregerson: The Court hereby GRANTS the parties Stipulation. The Court hereby orders as follows: 1. The corrected deadline to seek appointment as lead plaintiff is February 18, 2020.2. All other dates and deadlines in Docket No. 14 remain in place. (shb)
|
|
Filing 17
Joint STIPULATION to CORRECT Stipulation to Extend Time to Answer (More than 30 days), #14 filed by plaintiff Esteban Koffsmon. (Attachments: #1 Proposed Order [PROPOSED] ORDER RE JOINT STIPULATION TO REVISE CONTINUING DATE UPON WHICH RESPONSIVE PLEADING IS DUE (DKT. NO. 14))(Mah, Rosanne)
|
|
Filing 16
MINUTE ORDER IN CHAMBERS: This action has been assigned to the calendar of Judge Dean D. Pregerson. Counsel are encouraged to review the Central Districts website for additional information. The address ishttp://www.cacd.uscourts.gov. It is not necessary to clear a motion date with the Court Clerk prior to filing the motion. The Court hears motions only on Mondays at 10:00 a.m. See order for details. (shb)
|
|
Filing 15
NOTICE TO FILER OF DEFICIENCIES in Electronically Filed Documents RE: Stipulation to Extend Time to Answer (More than 30 days), #14 . The following error(s) was/were found: Proposed Document was not submitted as separate attachment. 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. (shb)
|
|
Filing 14
STIPULATION for Extension of Time to File Answer re Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening), #1 filed by Defendants Green Dot Corporation, Mark Shifke, Steven W Streit.(Attorney James N Kramer added to party Green Dot Corporation(pty:dft), Attorney James N Kramer added to party Mark Shifke (pty:dft), Attorney James N Kramer added to party Steven W Streit(pty:dft))(Kramer, James)
|
|
Filing 13
APPLICATION of Non-Resident Attorney Eduard Korsinsky to Appear Pro Hac Vice on behalf of Plaintiff Esteban Koffsmon (Pro Hac Vice Fee - $400 Fee Paid, Receipt No. 0973-25012704) filed by Plaintiff Esteban Koffsmon. (Attachments: #1 Proposed Order) (Godino, Marc)
|
|
Filing 12
Notice of Appearance or Withdrawal of Counsel: for attorney Marc L Godino counsel for Plaintiff Esteban Koffsmon. Adding Marc L. Godino as counsel of record for Esteban Koffsmon for the reason indicated in the G-123 Notice. Filed by Plaintiff Esteban Koffsmon. (Attorney Marc L Godino added to party Esteban Koffsmon(pty:pla))(Godino, Marc)
|
|
Filing 11
WAIVER OF SERVICE Returned Executed filed by Plaintiff Esteban Koffsmon. upon All Defendants. Waiver of Service signed by M. Todd Scott. (Mah, Rosanne)
|
|
Filing 10
21 DAY Summons Issued re Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening), #1 as to Defendant Steven W Streit. (ghap)
|
|
Filing 9
21 DAY Summons Issued re Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening), #1 as to Defendant Mark Shifke. (ghap)
|
|
Filing 8
21 DAY Summons Issued re Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening), #1 as to Defendant Green Dot Corporation. (ghap)
|
|
Filing 7
NOTICE OF PRO HAC VICE APPLICATION DUE for Non-Resident Attorney Eduard Korsinsky. A document recently filed in this case lists you as an out-of-state attorney of record. However, the Court has not been able to locate any record that you are admitted to the Bar of this Court, and you have not filed an application to appear Pro Hac Vice in this case. Accordingly, within 5 business days of the date of this notice, you must either (1) have your local counsel file an application to appear Pro Hac Vice (Form G-64) and pay the applicable fee, or (2) complete the next section of this form and return it to the court at cacd_attyadm@cacd.uscourts.gov. You have been removed as counsel of record from the docket in this case, and you will not be added back to the docket until your Pro Hac Vice status has been resolved. (ghap)
|
|
Filing 6
NOTICE TO PARTIES OF COURT-DIRECTED ADR PROGRAM filed. (ghap)
|
|
Filing 5
NOTICE OF ASSIGNMENT to District Judge Dean D. Pregerson and Magistrate Judge Charles F. Eick. (ghap)
|
|
Filing 4
CERTIFICATION AND NOTICE OF INTERESTED PARTIES CERTIFICATE of Interested Parties filed by Plaintiff Esteban Koffsmon, (Mah, Rosanne)
|
|
Filing 3
CERTIFICATION OF NAMED PLAINTIFF PURSUANT TO FEDERAL SECURITIES LAWS CERTIFICATE of Interested Parties filed by Plaintiff Esteban Koffsmon, (Mah, Rosanne)
|
|
Filing 2
Request for Clerk to Issue Summons on Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening), #1 filed by Plaintiff Esteban Koffsmon. (Mah, Rosanne)
|
|
Filing 1
COMPLAINT Receipt No: 0973-24979132 - Fee: $400, filed by Plaintiff Esteban Koffsmon. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit Exhibit A, #2 Civil Cover Sheet Civil Cover Sheet) (Attorney Rosanne Leigh Mah added to party Esteban Koffsmon(pty:pla))(Mah, Rosanne)
|
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.
