Maria Alvarado v. Target Corporation
| Maria Alvarado |
| Target Corporation and DOES 1-10 |
| 2:2021cv06561 |
| August 13, 2021 |
| US District Court for the Central District of California |
| Dale S Fischer |
| Michael R Wilner |
| Civil Rights: Jobs |
| 28 U.S.C. § 1441 |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on October 20, 2021. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 18 STIPULATION to Dismiss Case pursuant to FRCP 41 filed by Defendant Target Corporation. (Attachments: #1 Proposed Order re Stipulation to Dismiss, #2 Proof of Service)(Wilson, Brianna) |
| Filing 17 Text Only Entry Re: Settlement by Magistrate Judge Michael R. Wilner. Counsel informed the clerk that the parties reached an agreement on settlement. The parties are directed to file a notice of anticipated settlement by September 30, 2021. THERE IS NO PDF DOCUMENT ASSOCIATED WITH THIS ENTRY. (vm) TEXT ONLY ENTRY |
Filing 16
ORDER/REFERRAL to ADR Procedure No 1 by Judge Dale S. Fischer. Case ordered to Magistrate Judge Michael R. Wilner for Settlement Conference. ADR Proceeding to be held no later than 6/21/22. (rfi)
|
|
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 8/15/2022 at 3:00 PM before Judge Dale S. Fischer. Jury Trial set for 9/13/2022 at 8:30 AM before Judge Dale S. Fischer. (rfi)
|
| Filing 14 TEXT ONLY ENTRY: (IN CHAMBERS) SCHEDULING ORDER. The Court takes the Scheduling Conference off calendar and 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 13 PROOF OF SERVICE filed by Defendant Target Corporation, re Report #12 served on September 20, 2021. (Wilson, Brianna) |
| Filing 12 JOINT REPORT PURSUANT TO FRCP 26(f) REPORT filed by Defendant Target Corporation. (Wilson, Brianna) |
| Filing 11 JOINT REPORT PURSUANT TO FRCP 26(f) REPORT filed by Defendant Target Corporation. (Wilson, Brianna) |
|
Filing 10
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 9/27/2021 at 11:00 AM before Judge Dale S. Fischer. (dd)
|
|
Filing 9
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 8 Notice to Counsel Re Consent to Proceed Before a United States Magistrate Judge. (jtil) |
| Filing 7 NOTICE TO PARTIES OF COURT-DIRECTED ADR PROGRAM filed. (jtil) |
| Filing 6 NOTICE OF ASSIGNMENT to District Judge Dale S. Fischer and Magistrate Judge Michael R. Wilner. (jtil) |
| CONFORMED COPY OF COMPLAINT filed by Plaintiff Maria Alvarado in Ventura Superior Court on 12/14/2020, attached as Exhibit A. (jtil) |
| CONFORMED COPY OF FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT filed by Plaintiff Maria Alvarado in Ventura Superior Court on 7/8/2021, attached as Exhibit B. (jtil) |
| CONFORMED COPY OF ANSWER to Complaint filed by Defendant Target Corporation in Ventura Superior Court on 8/12/2021, attached as Exhibit D.(jtil) |
| Filing 5 REQUEST FOR JUDICIAL NOTICE filed by Defendant Target Corporation. (Wilson, Brianna) |
| Filing 4 CORPORATE DISCLOSURE STATEMENT filed by Defendant Target Corporation (Wilson, Brianna) |
| Filing 3 CERTIFICATE of Interested Parties filed by Defendant Target Corporation, (Wilson, Brianna) |
| Filing 2 CIVIL COVER SHEET filed by Defendant Target Corporation. (Wilson, Brianna) |
| Filing 1 NOTICE OF REMOVAL from Ventura County Superior Court, case number 56-2020-00547698 Receipt No: ACACDC-31803549 - Fee: $402, filed by Defendant Target Corporation. (Attachments: #1 Declaration of Brianna S. WIlson ISO Removal, #2 Exhibit A - Complaint, #3 Exhibit B - First Amended Complaint, #4 Exhibit C - Summons, #5 Exhibit D - Answer, #6 Declaration of Adam Klarfeld ISO Removal, #7 Proof of Service) (Attorney Brianna Simone Wilson added to party Target Corporation(pty:dft))(Wilson, Brianna) |
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.
