Jose Estrada v. Mardesich Company Torrance, LLC, et al
Plaintiff: Jose Estrada
Defendant: Mardesich Company Torrance, LLC, and Torrance Hanman Chain, Inc
Case Number: 2:2020cv10242
Filed: November 9, 2020
Court: US District Court for the Central District of California
Presiding Judge: Michael W Fitzgerald
Referring Judge: Gail J Standish
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights: Americans with Disabilities - Other
Cause of Action: 42 U.S.C. ยง 12101
Jury Demanded By: None
Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on December 23, 2020. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
December 23, 2020 Opinion or Order Filing 14 MINUTES (IN CHAMBERS) COURT ORDER by Judge Michael W. Fitzgerald. In light of the Notice of Settlement filed December 22, 2020 #13 , the Court sets a hearing on Order To Show Cause Re Dismissal for February 22,2021 at 11:30 a.m. If a stipulated dismissal is filed prior to this date, the matter will be taken off calendar and no appearance is needed. All other hearings and deadlines are hereby vacated. (iv)
December 22, 2020 Filing 13 NOTICE of Settlement and Request to Vacate All Currently Set Dates filed by Plaintiff Jose Estrada. (Attachments: #1 Proposed Order, #2 Proof of Service)(Seabock, Amanda)
December 22, 2020 Filing 12 PROOF OF SERVICE Executed by Plaintiff Jose Estrada, upon Defendant Mardesich Company Torrance, LLC, served on 12/18/2020, answer due 1/8/2021. Service of the Summons and Complaint were executed upon Jane Doe - Mother of Agent for Service in compliance with California Code of Civil Procedure by substituted service at home address and by also mailing a copy.Original Summons returned. (Handy, Russell)
November 30, 2020 Filing 11 PROOF OF SERVICE Executed by Plaintiff Jose Estrada, upon Defendant Torrance Hanman Chain, Inc served on 11/30/2020, answer due 12/21/2020. Service of the Summons and Complaint were executed upon Jacob Roh- Manager 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)
November 25, 2020 Filing 10 RESPONSE filed by Plaintiff Jose Estradato Minutes of In Chambers Order/Directive - no proceeding held,, Set/Reset Deadlines, #9 (Attachments: #1 Declaration, #2 Declaration)(Handy, Russell)
November 12, 2020 Opinion or Order Filing 9 MINUTE ORDER IN CHAMBERS by Judge Michael W. Fitzgerald: PLAINTIFF IS ORDERED TO SHOW CAUSE IN WRITING NO LATER THAN NOVEMBER 30, 2020 RE SUPPLEMENTAL JURISDICTION. 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 USC 1367 (c). (lc)
November 12, 2020 Filing 8 NOTICE to Parties Re (ADR-20) ADA Disability Access Litigation/Application for Stay and Early Mediation: PLAINTIFF IS DIRECTED to serve the ADA Packet on Defendant(s) at the same time the summons and complaint are served, if possible. If, upon receipt of this Notice to Parties, Plaintiff has already served Defendant(s), Plaintiff must serve the ADA Packet no later than fourteen (14) days after this Notice to Parties is filed by the Court. Within three (3) days of serving Defendant(s), Plaintiff must file with the Court a proof of service indicating that the ADA Packet was served on Defendant(s). *See Notice for further details.* (smom)
November 10, 2020 Filing 7 21 DAY Summons Issued re Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening) #1 as to Defendants Mardesich Company Torrance, LLC, and Torrance Hanman Chain, Inc. (jtil)
November 10, 2020 Filing 6 NOTICE TO PARTIES OF COURT-DIRECTED ADR PROGRAM filed. (jtil)
November 10, 2020 Filing 5 NOTICE OF ASSIGNMENT to District Judge Michael W. Fitzgerald and Magistrate Judge Gail J. Standish. (jtil)
November 9, 2020 Filing 4 Request for Clerk to Issue Summons on Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening) #1 filed by plaintiff Jose Estrada. (Handy, Russell)
November 9, 2020 Filing 3 NOTICE of Interested Parties filed by plaintiff Jose Estrada, (Handy, Russell)
November 9, 2020 Filing 2 CIVIL COVER SHEET filed by Plaintiff Jose Estrada. (Handy, Russell)
November 9, 2020 Filing 1 COMPLAINT Receipt No: ACACDC-28911180 - Fee: $400, filed by plaintiff Jose Estrada. (Attorney Russell C Handy added to party Jose Estrada(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 this case: Jose Estrada v. Mardesich Company Torrance, LLC, et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Mardesich Company Torrance, LLC,
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: Torrance Hanman Chain, Inc
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 ]
Plaintiff: Jose Estrada
Represented By: Russell C Handy
Represented By: Dennis Jay Price, II
Represented By: Amanda Lockhart Seabock
Represented By: Raymond George Ballister, Jr
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?