Jose Estrada v. Target Corporation et al
Jose Estrada |
Does 1-10 and Target Corporation |
2:2020cv01961 |
February 28, 2020 |
US District Court for the Central District of California |
Alexander F MacKinnon |
Civil Rights: Americans with Disabilities - Other |
42 U.S.C. ยง 12101 |
None |
Docket Report
This docket was last retrieved on July 21, 2020. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
Document Text |
---|
Filing 15 ORDER SETTING SCHEDULING CONFERENCE by Magistrate Judge Alexander F. MacKinnon. The matter is set for a scheduling conference on Tuesday, June 16, 2020, at 10 a.m. Counsel are further directed to submit form ADR-1, located on the Court's website at www.cacd.uscourts.gov, no later than 7 days before the scheduling conference date. (See order for details.) (es) |
Filing 14 CERTIFICATE of Interested Parties filed by Defendant Target Corporation, (Klein, Kyle) |
Filing 13 ANSWER to Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening) #1 filed by Defendant Target Corporation.(Klein, Kyle) |
Filing 12 NOTICE TO COUNSEL: ALL PARTIES having consented to proceed before a United States Magistrate Judge, this Please use the case number 2:20-cv-01961 AFM on all documents subsequently filed to ensure the proper routing of all filings. THERE IS NO PDF DOCUMENT ASSOCIATED WITH THIS ENTRY. TEXT ONLY ENTRY. (esa) |
Filing 11 STATEMENT OF CONSENT TO PROCEED before the assigned Magistrate Judge filed by Defendant Target Corporation. (Klein, Kyle) |
Filing 10 REMINDER NOTICE re Magistrate Judge Direct Assignment Program. Each party must file form CV-11C within the consent deadlines pursuant to L.R. 73-2. Additionally, the parties are directed to L.R. 73-2.2 Proof of Service. In any case in which only a magistrate judge is initially assigned, plaintiff must file a proof of service within 10 days of service of the summons and complaint as to each defendant. (es) |
Filing 9 STIPULATION Extending Time to Answer the complaint as to Target Corporation answer now due 4/24/2020, re Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening) #1 filed by Defendant Target Corporation.(Attorney Kyle P Klein added to party Target Corporation(pty:dft))(Klein, Kyle) |
Filing 8 PROOF OF SERVICE Executed by Plaintiff Jose Estrada, upon Defendant Target Corporation served on 3/6/2020, answer due 3/27/2020. Service of the Summons and Complaint were executed upon Agent for Service of Process: c t Corporation System (Jessie Gastelo, intake specialist) in compliance with California Code of Civil Procedure by personal service.Original Summons returned. (Handy, Russell) |
Filing 7 STATEMENT OF CONSENT TO PROCEED before the assigned Magistrate Judge filed by Plaintiff Jose Estrada. (Attachments: #1 Proof of Service)(Handy, Russell) |
Filing 6 21 DAY Summons Issued re Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening) #1 as to Defendant Target Corporation. (et) |
Filing 5 NOTICE TO COUNSEL re Magistrate Judge Direct Assignment Program. This case has been randomly assigned to Magistrate Judge Alexander F. MacKinnon. (Attachments: #1 CV11C Statement of Consent) (et) |
Filing 4 Request for Clerk to Issue Summons on Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening) #1 filed by plaintiff Jose Estrada. (Handy, Russell) |
Filing 3 CERTIFICATE of Interested Parties filed by Plaintiff Jose Estrada, (Handy, Russell) |
Filing 2 CIVIL COVER SHEET filed by Plaintiff Jose Estrada. (Handy, Russell) |
Filing 1 COMPLAINT Receipt No: ACACDC-25547155 - Fee: $400, filed by plaintiff Jose Estrada. (Attorney Russell C Handy added to party Jose Estrada(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.