Andres Gomez v. 602 Santa Monica Partners, L.P.
| Andres Gomez |
| 602 Santa Monica Partners, L.P. doing business as Tar & Roses and 602 Santa Monica Partners, L.P. doing business as Tar and Roses |
| 2:2021cv05559 |
| July 8, 2021 |
| US District Court for the Central District of California |
| John A Kronstadt |
| Margo A Rocconi |
| Civil Rights: Americans with Disabilities - Other |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 12101 Americans With Disabilities Act |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on September 20, 2021. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 14 NOTICE of Voluntary Dismissal filed by Plaintiff Andres Gomez. Dismissal is with prejudice. (Moore, Tanya) |
Filing 13
ORDER RE SECOND STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME TO FILE ANSWER (DKT. #12 ) by Judge John A. Kronstadt, the Stipulation is APPROVED. Defendant's deadline to file an Answer to the Complaint is extended from September 10, 2021, to October 1, 2021. (jp)
|
| Filing 12 Second STIPULATION for Extension of Time to File Answer to 10/1/2021 filed by Attorney for Defendant 602 Santa Monica Partners, L.P.. (Attachments: #1 Proposed Order)(Reeves, Rex) |
| Filing 11 STIPULATION Extending Time to Answer the complaint as to 602 Santa Monica Partners, L.P. answer now due 9/10/2021, filed by Attorney for Defendant 602 Santa Monica Partners, L.P..(Attorney Rex T Reeves added to party 602 Santa Monica Partners, L.P.(pty:dft))(Reeves, Rex) |
| Filing 10 PROOF OF SERVICE Executed by Plaintiff Andres Gomez, upon Defendant 602 Santa Monica Partners, L.P. served on 7/22/2021, answer due 8/12/2021. Service of the Summons and Complaint were executed upon Gay L. Harwin, Registered Agent in compliance with California Code of Civil Procedure by personal service.Original Summons NOT returned. (Moore, Tanya) |
|
Filing 9
STANDING ORDERS FOR CIVIL CASES ASSIGNED TO JUDGE JOHN A. KRONSTADT upon filing of the complaint by Judge John A. Kronstadt. Please read each Order carefully as they differ in some respects from the Local Rules. Counsel are advised that the Court, at any time, may amend one or more of its Standing Orders. It is the responsibility of counsel to refer to this Court's Procedures and Schedules found on the website for the United States District Court, Central District of California (www.cacd.uscourts.gov) to obtain the operative order. The Court thanks the parties and their counsel for their anticipated cooperation in carrying out these requirements. (droj)
|
| Filing 8 Notice to Counsel Re Consent to Proceed Before a United States Magistrate Judge. (lh) |
| Filing 7 21 DAY Summons Issued re Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening) #1 as to Defendant 602 Santa Monica Partners, L.P. (lh) |
| Filing 6 NOTICE TO PARTIES OF COURT-DIRECTED ADR PROGRAM filed. (lh) |
| Filing 5 NOTICE OF ASSIGNMENT to District Judge John A. Kronstadt and Magistrate Judge Margo A. Rocconi. (lh) |
| Filing 4 NOTICE of Interested Parties filed by plaintiff Andres Gomez, identifying Andres Gomez. (Moore, Tanya) |
| Filing 3 Request for Clerk to Issue Summons on Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening) #1 filed by plaintiff Andres Gomez. (Moore, Tanya) |
| Filing 2 CIVIL COVER SHEET filed by Plaintiff Andres Gomez. (Moore, Tanya) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT Receipt No: ACACDC-31600601 - Fee: $402, filed by plaintiff Andres Gomez. (Attorney Tanya Moore added to party Andres Gomez(pty:pla))(Moore, Tanya) |
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.
