Khachik Manouk Arakelian v. Ford Motor Company et al
Khachik Manouk Arakelian |
Ford Motor Company and Does 1 through 100, inclusive |
2:2021cv02735 |
March 30, 2021 |
US District Court for the Central District of California |
R Gary Klausner |
Alka Sagar |
Prop. Damage Prod. Liability |
28 U.S.C. ยง 1441 |
Defendant |
Docket Report
This docket was last retrieved on May 13, 2021. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
Document Text |
---|
Filing 14 Receipt of Letter of Transmittal - Remand to Superior Court. (jp) |
Filing 13 TRANSMITTAL of documents to Superior Court of CA for the County of Los Angeles. A certified copy of the order of remand and a copy of the docket sheet from this court was sent to Superior Court of CA for the County of Los Angeles. (lom) |
Filing 12 MINUTE ORDER (IN CHAMBERS) Order Re: Remanding to State Comi by Judge R. Gary Klausner. To date, Defendant has yet to file a response to the OSC. The Court therefore orders the case remanded to state court. (Made JS-6. Case Terminated.) (lom) |
Filing 11 MINUTE ORDER (IN CHAMBERS) Order Re: Order to Show Cause by Judge R. Gary Klausner. Accordingly, Defendant is ordered to show cause in writing by April 21, 2021 that Defendant is diverse from Plaintiff for citizenship purposes, and that the amount in controversy exceeds $75,000. (lom) |
Filing 10 ORDER SETTING SCHEDULING CONFERENCE by Judge R. Gary Klausner. Rule 26 Meeting Report due by 6/21/2021. Scheduling Conference set for 6/28/2021 at 9:00 am. (sw) |
Filing 9 STANDING ORDER REGARDING NEWLY ASSIGNED CASES by Judge R. Gary Klausner. (sw) |
Filing 8 NOTICE OF REASSIGNMENT of MJDAP case from Magistrate Judge Michael R. Wilner to Judge R. Gary Klausner for all further proceedings. Any discovery matters that may be referred to a Magistrate Judge are assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Alka Sagar. The case number will now reflect the initials of the transferee Judges 2:21-cv-02735 RGK (ASx). (esa) |
Filing 7 STATEMENT Consent for Magistrate Judge filed by Defendant Ford Motor Company (Proudfoot, Matthew) |
Filing 6 NOTICE TO COUNSEL re Magistrate Judge Direct Assignment Program. This case has been randomly assigned to Magistrate Judge Michael R. Wilner. (Attachments: #1 CV11C Statement of Consent) (et) |
CONFORMED E-FILED COPY OF ANSWER TO COMPLAINT filed by Defendant Ford Motor Company. [FILED IN STATE COURT ON 3/26/2021 SUBMITTED ATTACHED AS ATTACHMENT NO. 2 TO NOTICE OF REMOVAL #1 ]. (et) |
CONFORMED E-FILED COPY OF COMPLAINT against Defendants Ford Motor Company, Does 1 through 100, inclusive, filed by Plaintiff Khachik Manouk Arakelian. [FILED IN STATE COURT ON 2/22/2021 SUBMITTED ATTACHED TO NOTICE OF REMOVAL #1 ]. (et) |
Filing 5 NOTICE of Interested Parties filed by Defendant Ford Motor Company, (Proudfoot, Matthew) |
Filing 4 NOTICE of Appearance filed by attorney Matthew M Proudfoot on behalf of Defendant Ford Motor Company (Proudfoot, Matthew) |
Filing 3 DECLARATION of Matthew M. Proudfoot re Notice of Removal (Attorney Civil Case Opening), #1 filed by Defendant Ford Motor Company. (Proudfoot, Matthew) |
Filing 2 CIVIL COVER SHEET filed by Defendant Ford Motor Company. (Proudfoot, Matthew) |
Filing 1 NOTICE OF REMOVAL from Los Angeles, case number 21STCV06840 Receipt No: ACACDC-31011799 - Fee: $402, filed by Defendant Ford Motor Company. (Attachments: #1 Summons & Complaint - State Court, #2 Answer to Complaint - State Court) (Attorney Matthew M Proudfoot added to party Ford Motor Company(pty:dft))(Proudfoot, Matthew) |
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.