Evangelina Soto v. Team Industrial Services, Inc. et al
| Evangelina Soto |
| Team Industrial Services, Inc. and Does 1 through 10, inclusive |
| 2:2021cv05483 |
| July 6, 2021 |
| US District Court for the Central District of California |
| Dale S Fischer |
| Alka Sagar |
| Civil Rights: Jobs |
| 28 U.S.C. § 1441 |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on November 28, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 17
ORDER/REFERRAL to ADR Procedure No 3 by Judge Dale S. Fischer. Case ordered to a private mediator based upon a stipulation of the parties or by the court order. ADR Proceeding to be held no later than 8/22/22. (rfi)
|
| Filing 16 TEXT ONLY ENTRY: (IN CHAMBERS) SCHEDULING ORDER. The establishes the case management dates as proposed by parties in the Joint Rule 26(f) Report as further described in the Schedule of Pretrial and Trial dates except as noted in the Order re Trial. (See Order re Trial for specific dates and times.) These dates and requirements are firm. The Court is very unlikely to grant continuances unless the parties establish good cause through a concrete showing. Failure to complete discovery in a timely manner does not constitute good cause, nor does the fact that a settlement conference is pending. Each side is limited to five motions in limine unless the Court orders otherwise. All fictitiously named defendants are dismissed. THERE IS NO PDF DOCUMENT ASSOCIATED WITH THIS ENTRY. (rfi) TEXT ONLY ENTRY |
|
Filing 15
Order re Jury Trial by Judge Dale S. Fischer. These dates and requirements are firm. The Court is very unlikely to grant continuances unless the parties establish good cause through a concrete showing. Failure to complete discovery in a timely manner does not constitute good cause, nor does the fact that a settlement conference is pending. Each side is limited to five motions in limine, unless the Court orders otherwise. See Trial Order for specifics. Final Pretrial Conference set for 12/19/2022 at 03:00 PM before Judge Dale S. Fischer. Jury Trial set for 1/24/2023 at 08:30 AM before Judge Dale S. Fischer. (dd)
|
| Filing 14 DECLARATION of Crystal F. Mohsin re Status Report #13 filed by Plaintiff Evangelina Soto. (Zambrano, Ronald) |
| Filing 13 STATUS REPORT filed by Plaintiff Evangelina Soto. (Zambrano, Ronald) |
| Filing 12 DECLARATION of Poline A. Pourmorady re Text Only Scheduling Notice,,,,,,,,,,, 11 filed by Defendant Team Industrial Services, Inc.. (Hoffman, Christopher) |
|
Filing 11
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE RE SANCTIONS. This overburdened court and its staff do not have time to communicate repeatedly with counsel in an effort to have them follow the rules and orders of this Court. Counsel have failed to comply with the Order Setting Scheduling Conference and the attached Schedule of Pretrial and Trial Dates in one or more respects. For example, counsel may have (1) failed to file a Joint 26(f) Report at all, (2) failed to provide all of the information required by the Order, (3) failed to attach a Schedule, or (4) failed to complete the Schedule properly. Counsel are ordered to show cause why each side should not be sanctioned in the amount of $500 for their failure to comply with the Order. Counsel whose signature appears on the Joint 26(f) Report must file a declaration stating who was (1) responsible for meeting with opposing counsel, (2) responsible for preparing and reviewing the Report and ensuring its accuracy and compliance with the Order, and (3) responsible for filing the Report. The declaration should state that person's name (only if the person is an attorney) and the persons position (partner, associate, paralegal, assistant, secretary, etc.). The declaration shall also state why the Report failed to comply with the Order. If no Report was filed, the declaration must state who was (1) responsible for calendaring the date for meeting with counsel and filing the Report, (2) responsible for responsible for meeting with opposing counsel, and (3) responsible for filing the Report. The same information as to name and position must be provided as well as an explanation as to why no Report was filed. In addition, the parties are ordered to review the Order Setting Scheduling Conference and the attached Schedule of Pretrial and Trial Dates carefully, and to provide a Report and a Schedule that provides specific dates for all of the relevant items in the Schedule. The dates must comply with the time frames in the Weeks before trial column and the required days of the week: a Monday (not a holiday) for the pretrial conference and last day for hearing motions and a Tuesday (not a holiday) for trial. The declarations, Report, and Schedule are due within five Court days. The filing of compliant declarations, Report, and Schedule will be a sufficient response to this Order to Show Cause. The scheduling conference date is vacated. The parties are urged to conduct themselves in a professional manner and to make every effort to agree on dates. Further failures to comply with the rules and orders of this Court, and the rules and orders of the Central District, will result in sanctions against one or both parties. THERE IS NO PDF DOCUMENT ASSOCIATED WITH THIS ENTRY. (rfi) TEXT ONLY ENTRY
|
| Filing 10 STATUS REPORT filed by Plaintiff Evangelina Soto. (Zambrano, Ronald) |
|
Filing 9
ORDER SETTING SCHEDULING CONFERENCE by Judge Dale S. Fischer. The Joint Report must include the completed Schedule of Pretrial and Trial dates. Lead trial counsel are ordered to appear in person unless counsel have been excused by the Court. Scheduling Conference set for 8/16/2021 at 11:00 AM before Judge Dale S. Fischer. (dd)
|
| Filing 8 ANSWER to Complaint - (Discovery) filed by Defendant Team Industrial Services, Inc..(Hoffman, Christopher) |
|
Filing 7
STANDING ORDER FOR CASES ASSIGNED TO JUDGE DALE S. FISCHER upon filing of the complaint by Judge Dale S. Fischer. If a party would be entitled to attorneys fees, counsel are referred to the Order Re Fees found on Court's website under Judge Fischer's Procedures and Schedules contained in the Judge's Requirements tab. Read all Orders carefully. They govern this case and differ in some respects from the Local Rules. COUNSEL ARE ORDERED TO PROVIDE A MANDATORY CHAMBERS COPY OF THE COMPLAINT, NOTICE OF REMOVAL, AND ANY OTHER INITIATING DOCUMENTS. (dd)
|
| Filing 6 Notice to Counsel Re Consent to Proceed Before a United States Magistrate Judge. (ghap) |
| Filing 5 NOTICE TO PARTIES OF COURT-DIRECTED ADR PROGRAM filed. (ghap) |
| Filing 4 NOTICE OF ASSIGNMENT to District Judge Dale S. Fischer and Magistrate Judge Alka Sagar. (ghap) |
| CONFORMED FILED COPY OF COMPLAINT against Defendants Does 1 through 10, inclusive, Team Industrial Services, Inc. Jury Demanded., filed by plaintiff Evangelina Soto. (FILED IN STATE COURT ON 5/18/2021 SUBMITTED ATTACHED EXHIBIT A) (ghap) |
| Filing 3 NOTICE of Parties with Financial Interest filed by Defendant Team Industrial Services, Inc.. (Hoffman, Christopher) |
| Filing 2 CIVIL COVER SHEET filed by Defendant Team Industrial Services, Inc.. (Hoffman, Christopher) |
| Filing 1 NOTICE OF REMOVAL from Los Angeles Superior Court, case number 21STCV18694 Receipt No: ACACDC-31584326 - Fee: $402, filed by Defendant Team Industrial Services, Inc.. (Attachments: #1 Declaration of Jamie L. Gross) (Attorney Christopher C Hoffman added to party Team Industrial Services, Inc.(pty:dft))(Hoffman, Christopher) |
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.
