Stacy Marie Savala v. Andrew Saul
| Stacy Marie Savala |
| Saul Andrew and Andrew Saul |
| 2:2020cv04737 |
| May 27, 2020 |
| US District Court for the Central District of California |
| Alicia G Rosenberg |
| Social Security: SSID Tit. XIV |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 205 |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on June 11, 2021. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 13 NOTICE TO COUNSEL: ALL PARTIES having consented to proceed before a United States Magistrate Judge, this case has been reassigned to Magistrate Judge Alicia G. Rosenberg for all further proceedings. Please use the case number CV20-4737 AGR 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. (sn) |
| Filing 12 CONSENT TO PROCEED before Magistrate Judge, in accordance with Title 28 Section 636(c) and F.R.CIV.P 73(b), filed by Plaintiff Stacy Marie Savala. (Rosales, Steven) |
| Filing 11 PROOF OF SERVICE Executed by Plaintiff Stacy Marie Savala, upon Defendant Andrew Saul served on 6/17/2020, answer due 10/15/2020. Service of the Summons and Complaint were executed upon the United States Attorneys Office by delivering a copy to Attorney General. Executed upon the Attorney Generals Office of the United States by delivering a copy to General Counsel. Executed upon the officer agency or corporation by delivering a copy to Civil Process Clerk. Service was executed in compliance with Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Due diligence declaration attached. Registered or certified mail return receipt attached. Original Summons NOT returned. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit 1)(Rosales, Steven) |
| Filing 10 CONSENT TO PROCEED before Magistrate Judge, in accordance with Title 28 Section 636(c) and F.R.CIV.P 73(b), filed by Defendant Andrew Saul. (Attorney Jean M Turk added to party Andrew Saul(pty:dft))(Turk, Jean) |
Filing 9
CASE MANAGEMENT ORDER [Social Security] by Magistrate Judge Alicia G. Rosenberg. THE COURT'S CASE MANAGEMENT ORDER HAS BEEN REVISED EFFECTIVE JANUARY 2016. PLEASE REVIEW THIS ORDER CAREFULLY. In accordance with General Order 05-01, this case is designated for electronic filing. A chambers copy is required only for the joint stipulation and the certified administrative record. In order to facilitate the just, speedy, and inexpensive determination of this case, the parties shall comply with the following instructions: (see document for further details). (hr)
|
| Filing 8 60 DAY Summons Issued re Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening) #1 as to Defendant Andrew Saul. (hr) |
|
Filing 7
ORDER by Magistrate Judge Alicia G. Rosenberg: granting #3 REQUEST to Proceed in Forma Pauperis with Declaration in Support (CV-60). (hr)
|
| Filing 6 NOTICE OF ASSIGNMENT to District Judge Cormac J. Carney and referred to Magistrate Judge Alicia G. Rosenberg. (esa) |
| Filing 5 NOTICE of Interested Parties filed by Plaintiff Stacy Marie Savala, (Rosales, Steven) |
| Filing 4 CIVIL COVER SHEET filed by Plaintiff Stacy Marie Savala. (Rosales, Steven) |
| Filing 3 REQUEST to Proceed In Forma Pauperis, Declaration in Support filed by Plaintiff Stacy Marie Savala. (Rosales, Steven) |
| Filing 2 Request for Clerk to Issue Summons on Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening) #1 filed by Plaintiff Stacy Marie Savala. (Rosales, Steven) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT with In Forma Pauperis request, filed by Plaintiff Stacy Marie Savala. (Attorney Steven G Rosales added to party Stacy Marie Savala (pty:pla))(Rosales, Steven) |
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.
