Brian Hazel v. Himagine Solutions, Inc.
Plaintiff: Brian Hazel
Defendant: Himagine Solutions, Inc.
Case Number: 2:2020cv06072
Filed: July 8, 2020
Court: US District Court for the Central District of California
Presiding Judge: Dale S Fischer
Referring Judge: Michael R Wilner
Nature of Suit: Labor: Fair Standards
Cause of Action: 29 U.S.C. ยง 201
Jury Demanded By: Both
Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on November 17, 2020. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
August 7, 2020 Opinion or Order Filing 16 ORDER by Judge Dale S. Fischer GRANTING Stipulation to Continue Scheduling Conference Pending Mediation #15 . The Scheduling Conference is continued to 9/14/2020 at 11:00 AM. See Order for specifics. (jp)
July 30, 2020 Filing 15 STIPULATION to Continue Scheduling Conference from 08/17/2020 to 09/08/2020 or any available date thereafter filed by defendant Himagine Solutions, Inc.. (Attachments: #1 Proposed Order)(Hutton, Zachary)
July 23, 2020 Filing 14 NOTICE of Appearance filed by attorney Scott Lewis Gordon on behalf of Plaintiff Brian Hazel (Attorney Scott Lewis Gordon added to party Brian Hazel(pty:pla))(Gordon, Scott)
July 16, 2020 Opinion or Order Filing 13 ORDER SETTING SCHEDULING CONFERENCE by Judge Dale S. Fischer. The Joint Report must include the completed Schedule of Pretrial and Trial dates. Lead trial counsel are ordered to appear in person unless counsel have been excused by the Court. Scheduling Conference set for 8/17/2020 at 11:00 AM before Judge Dale S. Fischer. (rfi)
July 15, 2020 Filing 12 ANSWER to Amended Complaint filed by Defendant Himagine Solutions, Inc..(Hutton, Zachary)
July 9, 2020 Filing 11 PROOF OF SERVICE filed by defendant Himagine Solutions, Inc., re Notice to Parties of Court-Directed ADR Program (ADR-8) - optional html form #8 , Notice of Assignment to United States Judges(CV-18) - optional html form #7 , Initial Order upon Filing of Complaint - form only,, #9 served on 07/09/2020. (Hutton, Zachary)
July 9, 2020 Opinion or Order Filing 9 STANDING ORDER FOR CASES ASSIGNED TO JUDGE DALE S. FISCHER upon filing of the complaint by Judge Dale S. Fischer. If a party would be entitled to attorneys fees, counsel are referred to the Order Re Fees found on Court's website under Judge Fischer's Procedures and Schedules contained in the Judge's Requirements tab. Read all Orders carefully. They govern this case and differ in some respects from the Local Rules. COUNSEL ARE ORDERED TO PROVIDE A MANDATORY CHAMBERS COPY OF THE COMPLAINT, NOTICE OF REMOVAL, AND ANY OTHER INITIATING DOCUMENTS. (rfi)
July 9, 2020 Filing 8 NOTICE TO PARTIES OF COURT-DIRECTED ADR PROGRAM filed. (jtil)
July 9, 2020 Filing 7 NOTICE OF ASSIGNMENT to District Judge Dale S. Fischer and Magistrate Judge Michael R. Wilner. (jtil)
July 8, 2020 FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT filed by Plaintiff Brian Hazel in Los Angeles Superior Court on 5/21/2020, attached as Exhibit C. (jtil)
July 8, 2020 Filing 6 PROOF OF SERVICE filed by defendant Himagine Solutions, Inc., re Notice of Removal (Attorney Civil Case Opening),,, #1 , Notice (Other) #5 , Civil Cover Sheet (CV-71) #2 , Certificate/Notice of Interested Parties #4 , Corporate Disclosure Statement #3 served on 07/08/2020. (Hutton, Zachary)
July 8, 2020 Filing 5 NOTICE OF PENDENCY OF OTHER ACTION OR PROCEEDING filed by defendant Himagine Solutions, Inc.. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A - FAC Johnson v. Himagine)(Hutton, Zachary)
July 8, 2020 Filing 4 NOTICE of Interested Parties filed by Defendant Himagine Solutions, Inc., identifying RCM Equity LLC; RCM Intermediate Holdings, Inc.; and RCM Acquisition, Inc.. (Hutton, Zachary)
July 8, 2020 Filing 3 CORPORATE DISCLOSURE STATEMENT filed by Defendant Himagine Solutions, Inc. identifying RCM Equity LLC; RCM Intermediate Holdings, Inc.; and RCM Acquisition, Inc. as Corporate Parent. (Hutton, Zachary)
July 8, 2020 Filing 2 CIVIL COVER SHEET filed by Defendant Himagine Solutions, Inc.. (Hutton, Zachary)
July 8, 2020 Filing 1 NOTICE OF REMOVAL from Los Angeles Superior Court, case number 20STCV17008 Receipt No: ACACDC-27119704 - Fee: $400, filed by defendant Himagine Solutions, Inc.. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit Complaint, #2 Exhibit Court Order regarding Complex Determination, #3 Exhibit First Amended Complaint, #4 Exhibit Summons and Other Papers Received from Plaintiff, #5 Exhibit Peremptory Challenge and Declaration, #6 Exhibit Order Denying Peremptory Challenge, #7 Exhibit Initial Status Conference Order, Minute Order, and Certificate of Mailing, #8 Exhibit Minute Order regarding the Initial Status Conference Order, and Certificate of Mailing, #9 Exhibit Superior Court's Online Docket) (Attorney Zachary P Hutton added to party Himagine Solutions, Inc.(pty:dft))(Hutton, Zachary)

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 this case: Brian Hazel v. Himagine Solutions, Inc.
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Brian Hazel
Represented By: David C Leimbach
Represented By: Carolyn H Cottrell
Represented By: Scott Lewis Gordon
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Himagine Solutions, Inc.
Represented By: Zachary P Hutton
Represented By: Anna Marie Skaggs
Represented By: Emily J Ratte
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]

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.


Why Is My Information Online?