Anthony Bouyer v. Burrito Works, Inc. et al
| ANTHONY BOUYER, an individual, and Anthony Bouyer |
| DOES 1-10 Inclusive, BURRITO WORKS, INC., a California corporation, ALAN R. WOLFSON and RANDI P. WOLFSON, individually and as trustees of THE WOLFSON FAMILY TRUST DATED OCTOBER 16, 1990, Alan R. Wolfson, Randi P. Wolfson, Does 1-10, inclusive and Burrito Works, Inc. |
| 2:2020cv10690 |
| November 23, 2020 |
| US District Court for the Central District of California |
| Pedro V Castillo |
| Otis D Wright |
| Civil Rights: Americans with Disabilities - Other |
| 42 U.S.C. § 12101 |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on December 18, 2020. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 18 PROOF OF SERVICE Executed by Plaintiff Anthony Bouyer, upon Defendant Burrito Works, Inc. served on 12/17/2020, answer due 1/7/2021. in compliance with California Code of Civil Procedure by substituted service at business address and by also mailing a copy.Original Summons NOT returned. (Manning, Joseph) |
| Filing 17 PROOF OF SERVICE Executed by Plaintiff Anthony Bouyer, upon Defendant Randi P. Wolfson served on 12/17/2020, answer due 1/7/2021. in compliance with California Code of Civil Procedure by substituted service at home address and by also mailing a copy.Original Summons NOT returned. (Manning, Joseph) |
Filing 16
MINUTE ORDER In Chambers by Judge Otis D. Wright, II. Pursuant to Plaintiff's Notice of Voluntary Dismissal (ECF No. #15 ) and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1): IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 1. The entire action and all claims asserted therein are hereby DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE; 2. Each party shall bear its own costs and attorneys' expenses. See minute order for details. (Made JS-6. Case Terminated.) (lom)
|
| Filing 15 NOTICE of Voluntary Dismissal filed by Plaintiff Anthony Bouyer. Dismissal is With Prejudice. (Manning, Joseph) |
| Filing 14 PROOF OF SERVICE Executed by Plaintiff Anthony Bouyer, upon Defendant Alan R. Wolfson served on 12/6/2020, answer due 12/28/2020. in compliance with California Code of Civil Procedure by personal service.Original Summons NOT returned. (Manning, Joseph) |
|
Filing 13
MINUTE ORDER IN CHAMBERS by Judge Otis D. Wright, II: ORDER REGARDING PROSECUTION OF CERTAIN CASES UNDER THE AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT. The Court finds that there is good cause to institute a limited scheduling order concerning basic case prosecution for cases under the Americans With Disabilities Act involving physical barriers in places of public accommodation. (SEE DOCUMENT FOR SPECIFIC ENUMERATED REQUIREMENTS AND DEADLINES THEREIN). The failure to comply with this Order in a particular case will result in a sanction of $300.00 payable to the clerk of the court within two weeks of Plaintiff being given notice of noncompliance and dismissal for lack of prosecution. The Court finds these sanctions sufficient and necessary to deter violations of the Order and to achieve timely prosecution of these cases without unnecessary intervention by the Court. (lc)
|
| Filing 12 Notice to Parties: ADA Disability Access Litigation. (lc) |
|
Filing 11
MINUTE ORDER IN CHAMBERS by Judge Otis D Wright, II: This action has been assigned to the calendar of Judge Otis D. Wright II. Counsel are STRONGLY encouraged to review the Central Districts website for additional information. The parties may consent to proceed before a Magistrate Judge appearing on the voluntary consent list. PLEASE refer to Local Rule 79-5 for the submission of CIVIL ONLY SEALED DOCUMENTS. CRIMINAL SEALED DOCUMENTS will remain the same. Please refer to the Judges procedures and schedules for detailed instructions for submission of sealed documents. (lc)
|
|
Filing 10
MINUTE ORDER IN CHAMBERS by Judge Otis D. Wright, II: Plaintiff is ORDERED TO SHOW CAUSE in writing No Later Than December 14, 2020 why the Court should exercise supplemental jurisdiction over the Unruh Act claim and any other state law claim asserted in the Complaint. 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 declining to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over the Unruh Act and other state law claims, if any, and the dismissal of that claim pursuant to 28 USC 1367 (c). (lc)
|
| Filing 9 21 DAY Summons Issued re Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening) #1 as to Defendants Alan R. Wolfson, Randi P. Wolfson. (lh) |
| Filing 8 21 DAY Summons Issued re Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening) #1 as to Defendant Burrito Works, Inc. (lh) |
| Filing 7 NOTICE TO PARTIES OF COURT-DIRECTED ADR PROGRAM filed. (lh) |
| Filing 6 NOTICE OF ASSIGNMENT to District Judge Otis D. Wright, II and Magistrate Judge Pedro V. Castillo. (lh) |
| Filing 5 Request for Clerk to Issue Summons on Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening) #1 filed by plaintiff ANTHONY BOUYER, an individual,. (Manning, Joseph) |
| 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-29164416 - 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.
