Anthony Bouyer v. Amerco Real Estate Company, et al
ANTHONY BOUYER, an individual, and Anthony Bouyer |
AMERCO REAL ESTATE COMPANY, a Nevada corporation, DOES 1-10 Inclusive, Does 1-10, inclusive and Amerco Real Estate Company |
2:2020cv06928 |
July 31, 2020 |
US District Court for the Central District of California |
Steve Kim |
George H Wu |
Civil Rights: Americans with Disabilities - Other |
42 U.S.C. ยง 12101 |
Plaintiff |
Docket Report
This docket was last retrieved on November 5, 2020. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
Document Text |
---|
Filing 12 NOTICE OF REASSIGNMENT of MJDAP case from Magistrate Judge Alka Sagar to Judge George H. Wu for all further proceedings. Any discovery matters that may be referred to a Magistrate Judge are assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Steve Kim. The case number will now reflect the initials of the transferee Judges 2:20-cv-06928 GW(SKx). (rn) |
Filing 11 DECLINED STATEMENT OF CONSENT TO PROCEED before the assigned Magistrate Judge filed by Defendant Amerco Real Estate Company. (McCoy, Ryan) |
Filing 10 MINUTE (IN CHAMBERS) ORDER by Magistrate Judge Alka Sagar. This action has been assigned to the calendar of Magistrate Judge Alka Sagar under the Civil Consent Pilot Project. The parties are reminded to review the time requirements for consent set forth in the Notice to Counsel that was issued at the time of the filing of the complaint. Plaintiff is instructed to forthwith serve a copy of this Order on all parties that have already been served with the summons and complaint, or to serve all parties with a copy of this Order at the time of service of the summons and complaint. (hr) |
Filing 9 Joint STIPULATION Extending Time to Answer the complaint as to Amerco Real Estate Company answer now due 10/2/2020, re Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening) #1 filed by defendant Amerco Real Estate Company.(Attorney Ryan T McCoy added to party Amerco Real Estate Company(pty:dft))(McCoy, Ryan) |
Filing 8 PROOF OF SERVICE Executed by Plaintiff Anthony Bouyer, upon Defendant Amerco Real Estate Company served on 8/14/2020, answer due 9/4/2020. in compliance with California Code of Civil Procedure by personal service.Original Summons NOT returned. (Manning, Joseph) |
Filing 7 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 6 21 DAY Summons Issued re Complaint #1 as to defendant Amerco Real Estate Company. (esa) |
Filing 5 NOTICE TO COUNSEL re Magistrate Judge Direct Assignment Program. This case has been randomly assigned to Magistrate Judge Alka Sagar. (Attachments: #1 CV 11C) (esa) |
Filing 4 Request for Clerk to Issue Summons on Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening) #1 filed by plaintiff ANTHONY BOUYER, an individual,. (Manning, Joseph) |
Filing 3 CIVIL COVER SHEET filed by Plaintiff ANTHONY BOUYER, an individual,. (Manning, Joseph) |
Filing 2 Certification and NOTICE of Interested Parties filed by plaintiff ANTHONY BOUYER, an individual,, (Manning, Joseph) |
Filing 1 COMPLAINT Receipt No: ACACDC-27448984 - Fee: $400, filed by plaintiff ANTHONY BOUYER, an individual,. (Attorney Joseph Richard Manning, Jr added to party ANTHONY BOUYER, an individual, (pty:pla))(Manning, Joseph) |
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.