Dejon Cagle v. Inderjit Singh Multani et al
| Dejon Cagle |
| Love to Dream, Inc, Does 1-10 and Inderjit Singh Multani |
| 2:2020cv03038 |
| March 31, 2020 |
| US District Court for the Central District of California |
| Patricia A Donahue |
| Michael W Fitzgerald |
| Karen L Stevenson |
| Civil Rights: Americans with Disabilities - Other |
| 42 U.S.C. § 12101 |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on May 28, 2020. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 19 Notice of Appearance or Withdrawal of Counsel: for attorney Dennis Jay Price, II counsel for Plaintiff Dejon Cagle. Phyl Grace is no longer counsel of record for the aforementioned party in this case for the reason indicated in the G-123 Notice. Filed by Plaintiff Dejon Cagle. (Price, Dennis) |
Filing 18
MINUTES (IN CHAMBERS) ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE RE SUPPLEMENTAL JURISDICTION by Judge Michael W. Fitzgerald. Plaintiff is ORDERED to SHOW CAUSE in writing as to why this Court should exercise supplemental jurisdiction over the Unruh Act claim and the other state law claims alleged by Plaintiff. The Response shall be filed on or before JUNE 2, 2020. Failure to timely or adequately respond to this Order to Show Cause may, without further warning, result in the dismissal of the entire action without prejudice or the Court's declining to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over the Unruh Act claim and the dismissal of that claim pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1367(c). (iv)
|
| Filing 17 NOTICE OF REASSIGNMENT of MJDAP case from Magistrate Judge Karen L. Stevenson to Judge Michael W. Fitzgerald for all further proceedings. Any discovery matters that may be referred to a Magistrate Judge are assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Patricia A. Donahue. The case number will now reflect the initials of the transferee Judges 2:20-cv-03038 MWF(PDx). (rn) |
| Filing 16 DEFAULT BY CLERK F.R.Civ.P.55(a) as to Love to Dream, Inc., a California Corporation (hr) |
| Filing 15 REQUEST for Clerk to Enter Default against defendant Love to Dream, Inc filed by Plaintiff Dejon Cagle. (Attachments: #1 Declaration, #2 proof of service) (Seabock, Amanda) |
| Filing 14 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. (hr) |
| Filing 13 DEFAULT BY CLERK F.R.Civ.P.55(a) as to Inderjit Singh Multani (hr) |
| Filing 12 NOTICE OF CLERICAL ERROR, Re: Deficiency in Electronically Filed Documents (G-112A) #11 . A message at the top of the document (Request, Docket No. #10 ) allows the option to "Open With Different Viewer", a viewer in which the signature does appear on the Proof of Service. Therefore, the Notice of Deficiency was issued in error. (hr) |
| Filing 11 NOTICE TO FILER OF DEFICIENCIES in Electronically Filed Documents RE: REQUEST for Clerk to Enter Default against Defendant Inderjit Singh Multani #10 . The following error(s) was/were found: 1. The Proof of Service at Docket No. 10-2 is not signed. 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. (hr) |
| Filing 10 REQUEST for Clerk to Enter Default against Defendant Inderjit Singh Multani filed by Plaintiff Dejon Cagle. (Attachments: #1 Declaration, #2 Proof of Service) (Seabock, Amanda) |
| Filing 9 PROOF OF SERVICE Executed by Plaintiff Dejon Cagle, upon Defendant Love to Dream, Inc served on 4/20/2020, answer due 5/11/2020. Service of the Summons and Complaint were executed upon Gur Kaur- Co-Resident and Sister-in-law of agent for service (Entity Address) in compliance with California Code of Civil Procedure by substituted service at business address and by also mailing a copy.Original Summons returned. (Handy, Russell) |
| Filing 8 PROOF OF SERVICE Executed by Plaintiff Dejon Cagle, upon Defendant Inderjit Singh Multani served on 4/11/2020, answer due 5/4/2020. 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 Dejon Cagle. (Handy, Russell) |
| Filing 6 21 DAY Summons Issued re Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening) #1 as to Defendants Love to Dream, Inc, Inderjit Singh Multani. (et) |
| Filing 5 NOTICE TO COUNSEL re Magistrate Judge Direct Assignment Program. This case has been randomly assigned to Magistrate Judge Karen L. Stevenson. (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 Dejon Cagle. (Handy, Russell) |
| Filing 3 CERTIFICATE of Interested Parties filed by Plaintiff Dejon Cagle, (Handy, Russell) |
| Filing 2 CIVIL COVER SHEET filed by Plaintiff Dejon Cagle. (Handy, Russell) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT Receipt No: ACACDC-25926294 - Fee: $400, filed by plaintiff Dejon Cagle. (Attorney Russell C Handy added to party Dejon Cagle(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.
