Anthony Bouyer v. Nama Enterprises et al
| ANTHONY BOUYER, an individual, and Anthony Bouyer |
| MUKHTIAR S. KAMBOJ, an individual, DOES 1-10 Inclusive, NAMA ENTERPRISES, a California corporation, Does 1-10, inclusive, Mukhtiar S. Kamboj and Nama Enterprises |
| 2:2021cv01564 |
| February 19, 2021 |
| US District Court for the Central District of California |
| Maria A Audero |
| John F Walter |
| Civil Rights: Americans with Disabilities - Other |
| 42 U.S.C. § 12101 |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on July 14, 2021. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 17 DEFAULT BY CLERK F.R.Civ.P.55(a) as to Mukhtiar S. Kamboj. (iv) |
| Filing 16 DEFAULT BY CLERK F.R.Civ.P.55(a) as to Nama Enterprises. (iv) |
| Filing 15 REQUEST for Clerk to Enter Default against Defendant Mukhtiar S. Kamboj filed by Plaintiff Anthony Bouyer. (Attachments: #1 Declaration Entry of Default, #2 Exhibit Proof Of Service) (Manning, Joseph) |
| Filing 14 REQUEST for Clerk to Enter Default against Defendant Nama Enterprises filed by Plaintiff Anthony Bouyer. (Attachments: #1 Declaration Entry of Default, #2 Exhibit Proof Of Service) (Manning, Joseph) |
| Filing 13 PROOF OF SERVICE Executed by Plaintiff Anthony Bouyer, upon Defendant in compliance with California Code of Civil Procedure by substituted service at home address and by also mailing a copy.Original Summons NOT returned. AMENDED POS (Manning, Joseph) |
| Filing 12 PROOF OF SERVICE Executed by Plaintiff Anthony Bouyer, upon Defendant Nama Enterprises served on 3/18/2021, answer due 4/8/2021. 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 11 PROOF OF SERVICE Executed by Plaintiff Anthony Bouyer, upon Defendant Mukhtiar S. Kamboj served on 3/18/2021, answer due 4/8/2021. 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 10
STANDING ORDER by Judge John F. Walter. READ THIS ORDER CAREFULLY. IT CONTROLS THE CASE AND DIFFERS IN SOME RESPECTS FROM THE LOCAL RULES. This action has been assigned to the calendar of Judge John F. Walter. (iv)
|
| Filing 9 21 DAY Summons Issued re Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening) #1 as to Defendant Mukhtiar S. Kamboj. (ghap) |
| Filing 8 21 DAY Summons Issued re Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening) #1 as to Defendant Nama Enterprises. (ghap) |
| Filing 7 NOTICE TO PARTIES OF COURT-DIRECTED ADR PROGRAM filed. (ghap) |
| Filing 6 NOTICE OF ASSIGNMENT to District Judge John F. Walter and Magistrate Judge Maria A. Audero. (ghap) |
| 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-30617153 - Fee: $402, 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.
