Jesaniel Marrero v. PBR Management Inc. et al
Jesaniel Marrero |
Jon Roofeiim and PBR Management Inc. |
2:2020cv07112 |
August 7, 2020 |
US District Court for the Central District of California |
Pedro V Castillo |
Dolly M Gee |
Alicia G Rosenberg |
George H Wu |
Other Statutory Actions |
47 U.S.C. § 0227 |
Plaintiff |
Docket Report
This docket was last retrieved on December 1, 2020. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
Document Text |
---|
Filing 18 Amended APPLICATION for Clerk to Enter Default against Defendant PBR Management Inc. filed by Plaintiff Jesaniel Marrero. (Kaufman, Rachel) |
Filing 17 PROOF OF SERVICE Executed by Plaintiff Jesaniel Marrero, upon Defendant Service of the Summons and Complaint were executed upon Registered Agent in compliance with Federal Rules of Civil Procedure by personal service.Original Summons returned. (Attachments: #1 Affidavit of Service, Revised)(Kaufman, Rachel) |
|
Filing 15 NOTICE OF DEFICIENCY Re: Application for Entry of Default Against Defendant PBR Management Inc. #14 . The Clerk cannot enter the requested relief as: Proof of Service is lacking required information. The Proof of Service of Summons and Complaint does not indicate the location/address where service was made. Requesting party shall file a new Request/Application with noted deficiencies corrected in order to have default reconsidered. (gk) |
Filing 14 APPLICATION for Clerk to Enter Default against Defendant PBR Management Inc. filed by Plaintiff Jesaniel Marrero. (Kaufman, Rachel) |
|
|
Filing 10 PROOF OF SERVICE Executed by Plaintiff Jesaniel Marrero, upon Defendant PBR Management Inc. served on 8/11/2020, answer due 9/1/2020. Service of the Summons and Complaint were executed upon Registered Agent in compliance with Federal Rules of Civil Procedure by personal service.Original Summons returned. (Attachments: #1 Affidavit of Service)(Kaufman, Rachel) |
Filing 11 MINUTES OF IN CHAMBERS - TRANSFER OF CASE TO JUDGE GEE by Judge Dolly M. Gee: Please take notice that this action has been reassigned to the HONORABLE DOLLY M. GEE, United States District Judge, pursuant to the Order re Transfer Pursuant to General Order 19-03 filed on 8/11/2020. The case number will now read CV 20-7112-DMG (AGRx). Additional information about Judge Gee's procedures and schedules is available on the court's website at www.cacd.uscourts.gov. See document for further details. Court Reporter: Not Reported. (gk) |
|
Filing 8 21 DAY Summons Issued re Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening) #1 as to Defendants PBR Management Inc. and Jon Roofeiim. (Attachments: #1 Jon Roofeim) (jtil) |
Filing 7 NOTICE TO PARTIES OF COURT-DIRECTED ADR PROGRAM filed. (jtil) |
Filing 6 NOTICE OF ASSIGNMENT to District Judge George H. Wu and Magistrate Judge Pedro V. Castillo. (jtil) |
Filing 5 CERTIFICATE of Interested Parties filed by Plaintiff Jesaniel Marrero, (Kaufman, Rachel) |
Filing 4 CIVIL COVER SHEET filed by Plaintiff Jesaniel Marrero. (Kaufman, Rachel) |
Filing 3 Request for Clerk to Issue Summons on Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening) #1 filed by Plaintiff Jesaniel Marrero. (Kaufman, Rachel) |
Filing 2 Request for Clerk to Issue Summons on Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening) #1 filed by Plaintiff Jesaniel Marrero. (Kaufman, Rachel) |
Filing 1 COMPLAINT Receipt No: ACACDC-27539994 - Fee: $400, filed by Plaintiff Jesaniel Marrero. (Attorney Rachel Kaufman added to party Jesaniel Marrero(pty:pla))(Kaufman, Rachel) |
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.