Jane Doe v. Compania Panamena de Aviacion et al
| Jane Doe |
| Compania Panamena de Aviacion, COPA Holdings, Amir Mirghaffari, COPA Holdings, S.A. and Does 1 through 100, inclusive |
| 2:2021cv02536 |
| March 23, 2021 |
| US District Court for the Central District of California |
| Paul L Abrams |
| Philip S Gutierrez |
| P.I.: Other |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1331 |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on July 15, 2021. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 12 TEXT ONLY ENTRY (In Chambers) by Judge Philip S. Gutierrez: Please be advised the Motions to Dismiss #9 and #10 are both reset to 06/11/21 at 1:30PM.THERE IS NO PDF DOCUMENT ASSOCIATED WITH THIS ENTRY. (wm) TEXT ONLY ENTRY |
| Filing 11 NOTICE of Interested Parties filed by defendant Compania Panamena de Aviacion, identifying parent COPA Holdings, SA; Baillie Gifford & Co. and Sprucegrove Investment Management Ltd. own 10% or more of its stock. (Cunningham, Scott) |
| Filing 10 NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION to Dismiss plaintiff's state law causes of action against Compania Panamena de Aviacion SA for failure to state a claim and to Strike plaintiff's prayer for punitive damages filed by defendant Compania Panamena de Aviacion. Motion set for hearing on 6/7/2021 at 01:30 PM before Judge Philip S. Gutierrez. (Attachments: #1 Memorandum, #2 Proposed Order) (Attorney Scott D. Cunningham added to party Compania Panamena de Aviacion(pty:dft)) (Cunningham, Scott) |
| Filing 9 NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction and for Failure to State a Claim filed by Specially Appearing Defendant COPA Holdings, S.A.. Motion set for hearing on 6/7/2021 at 01:30 PM before Judge Philip S. Gutierrez. (Attachments: #1 Memorandum, #2 Declaration, #3 Proposed Order) (Cunningham, Scott) |
| Filing 8 First STIPULATION Extending Time to Answer the complaint as to COPA Holdings, S.A. answer now due 4/29/2021, filed by Defendant COPA Holdings, S.A..(Cunningham, Scott) |
| Filing 7 NOTICE to Adverse Party of Filing of Notice of Removal of Civil Action to U.S District Court filed by Specially Appearing Defendant COPA Holdings, S.A.. (Cunningham, Scott) |
Filing 6
STANDING ORDER REGARDING NEWLY ASSIGNED CASES by Judge Philip S. Gutierrez. (ji)
|
| Filing 5 NOTICE TO PARTIES OF COURT-DIRECTED ADR PROGRAM filed. (car) |
| Filing 4 NOTICE OF ASSIGNMENT to District Judge Philip S. Gutierrez and Magistrate Judge Paul L. Abrams. (car) |
| CONFORMED COPY OF COMPLAINT against Defendants COPA Holdings, S.A., Compania Panamena de Aviacion, Does 1 through 100, inclusive, Amir Mirghaffari, filed by Plaintiff Jane Doe. Filed in State Court on 10/10/2019 Submitted with Attachment 1 Exhibit A to Notice of Removal #1 (car) |
| Filing 3 NOTICE of Interested Parties filed by defendant COPA Holdings, identifying no corporate parent; other interested parties: Compania Panamena de Aviation, S.A; more than10% of stock owned by Baillie Gifford & Co. and Sprucegrove Investment Management Ltd.. (Cunningham, Scott) |
| Filing 2 CIVIL COVER SHEET filed by Defendant COPA Holdings. (Cunningham, Scott) |
| Filing 1 NOTICE OF REMOVAL from Los Angeles County, State of California Superior Court, case number 19STCV036396 Receipt No: ACACDC-30968566 - Fee: $402, filed by defendant COPA Holdings. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit (state court Complaint), #2 Proof of Service) (Attorney Scott D. Cunningham added to party COPA Holdings(pty:dft))(Cunningham, Scott) |
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.
