Cande's Liquor et al v. United States of America
Plaintiff: Cande's Liquor and Alfredo Martinrez Brito
Defendant: United States of America
Case Number: 2:2021cv06898
Filed: August 26, 2021
Court: US District Court for the Central District of California
Presiding Judge: Jean P Rosenbluth
Referring Judge: Mark C Scarsi
Nature of Suit: Other Statutes: Administrative Procedures Act/Review or Appeal of Agency Decision
Cause of Action: 05 U.S.C. § 7703
Jury Demanded By: Plaintiff
Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on September 15, 2021. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
September 15, 2021 Filing 18 PROOF OF SERVICE Executed by Plaintiff Cande's Liquor, Alfredo Martinrez Brito, upon Plaintiff United States of America served on 9/10/2021, answer due 11/9/2021. Service of the Summons and Complaint were executed upon the United States Attorneys Office by delivering a copy to Officer Marquez. Executed upon the Attorney Generals Office of the United States by unspecified means. Executed upon the officer agency or corporation by unspecified means. Service was executed in compliance with statute not specified. Due diligence declaration attached. Registered or certified mail return receipt NOT attached. (Sina, Reza)
September 2, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 17 ORDER GRANTING APPLICATION of Non-Resident Attorney Jeremy G. Feigenbaum to Appear Pro Hac Vice on behalf of Plaintiffs Alfredo Martinrez Brito, Cande's Liquor and designating Reza Sina as local counsel #16 by Judge Mark C. Scarsi (lc)
September 1, 2021 Filing 16 Second APPLICATION of Non-Resident Attorney Jeremy G. Feigenbaum to Appear Pro Hac Vice on behalf of Plaintiffs Alfredo Martinrez Brito, Cande's Liquor (Pro Hac Vice Fee - $500.00 Previously Paid on 8/26/2021, Receipt No. ACACDC-31880976) filed by plaintiff Alfredo Martinrez Brito, Cande's Liquor. (Attachments: #1 Proposed Order) (Sina, Reza)
August 31, 2021 Filing 15 RESPONSE BY THE COURT TO NOTICE TO FILER OF DEFICIENCIES IN ELECTRONICALLY FILED DOCUMENTS RE: Second APPLICATION of Non-Resident Attorney Jeremy G. Feigenbaum to Appear Pro Hac Vice on behalf of Plaintiffs Alfredo Martinrez Brito, Cande's Liquor (Pro Hac Vice Fee - $500.00 Previously Paid on 8/26/2021, Receipt No. ACACDC-31880976) #13 by Judge Mark C. Scarsi. The document is stricken and counsel is ordered to file an amended or corrected document by September 2, 2021. (smo)
August 31, 2021 Filing 14 NOTICE of Deficiency in Electronically Filed Pro Hac Vice Application RE: Second APPLICATION of Non-Resident Attorney Jeremy G. Feigenbaum to Appear Pro Hac Vice on behalf of Plaintiffs Alfredo Martinrez Brito, Cande's Liquor (Pro Hac Vice Fee - $500.00 Previously Paid on 8/26/2021, Receipt No. ACACDC-31880976) #13 . The following error(s) was/were found: Local Rule 5-4.3.4 Application not hand-signed. The attorney seeking to appear pro hac vice must complete Section 1 of this Application, personally sign, in ink, the certification in Section II, and have the designated Local Counsel sign in Section III. ELECTRONIC SIGNATURES ARE NOT ACCEPTED. See Instructions for Applicants (1) (G-64). Other error(s) with document(s): Case information is incomplete. Case number, DJ and MJ initials missing on application and proposed order.. (lt)
August 31, 2021 Filing 13 Second APPLICATION of Non-Resident Attorney Jeremy G. Feigenbaum to Appear Pro Hac Vice on behalf of Plaintiffs Alfredo Martinrez Brito, Cande's Liquor (Pro Hac Vice Fee - $500.00 Previously Paid on 8/26/2021, Receipt No. ACACDC-31880976) filed by plaintiff Alfredo Martinrez Brito, Cande's Liquor. (Attachments: #1 Proposed Order) (Sina, Reza)
August 29, 2021 Filing 12 RESPONSE BY THE COURT TO NOTICE TO FILER OF DEFICIENCIES IN ELECTRONICALLY FILED DOCUMENTS RE: APPLICATION of Non-Resident Attorney Jeremy G. Feigenbaum to Appear Pro Hac Vice on behalf of Plaintiffs CANDES LIQUOR, ALFREDO MARTINEZ BRITO (Pro Hac Vice Fee - $500 Fee Paid, Receipt No. ACACDC-31880976) #5 by Judge Mark C. Scarsi. The document is stricken and counsel is ordered to file an amended or corrected document by August 31, 2021. (smo)
August 29, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 11 INITIAL STANDING ORDER FOR CIVIL CASES ASSIGNED TO JUDGE MARK C. SCARSI upon filing of the complaint by Judge Mark C. Scarsi. (smo)
August 28, 2021 Filing 10 NOTICE of Deficiency in Electronically Filed Pro Hac Vice Application RE: APPLICATION of Non-Resident Attorney Jeremy G. Feigenbaum to Appear Pro Hac Vice on behalf of Plaintiffs CANDES LIQUOR, ALFREDO MARTINEZ BRITO (Pro Hac Vice Fee - $500 Fee Paid, Receipt No. ACACDC-31880976) #5 . The following error(s) was/were found: Local Rule 5-4.3.4 Application not hand-signed. Other error(s) with document(s): The attorney seeking to appear pro hac vice must complete Section 1 of this Application, personally sign, in ink, the certification in Section II, and have the designated Local Counsel sign in Section III. ELECTRONIC SIGNATURES ARE NOT ACCEPTED. See Instructions for Applicants (1) (G-64). (lt)
August 26, 2021 Filing 9 60 DAY Summons issued re Complaint #1 as to defendant United States of America. (esa)
August 26, 2021 Filing 8 Notice to Counsel Re Consent to Proceed Before a United States Magistrate Judge. (esa)
August 26, 2021 Filing 7 NOTICE TO PARTIES OF COURT-DIRECTED ADR PROGRAM filed. (esa)
August 26, 2021 Filing 6 NOTICE OF ASSIGNMENT to District Judge Mark C. Scarsi and Magistrate Judge Jean P. Rosenbluth. (esa)
August 26, 2021 Filing 5 APPLICATION of Non-Resident Attorney Jeremy G. Feigenbaum to Appear Pro Hac Vice on behalf of Plaintiffs CANDES LIQUOR, ALFREDO MARTINEZ BRITO (Pro Hac Vice Fee - $500 Fee Paid, Receipt No. ACACDC-31880976) filed by plaintiff CANDES LIQUOR, ALFREDO MARTINEZ BRITO. (Attachments: #1 Proposed Order) (Sina, Reza)
August 26, 2021 Filing 4 CERTIFICATE of Interested Parties filed by Plaintiff CANDES LIQUOR, ALFREDO MARTINEZ BRITO, identifying n/a. (Sina, Reza)
August 26, 2021 Filing 3 Request for Clerk to Issue Summons on Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening), #1 filed by plaintiff CANDES LIQUOR, ALFREDO MARTINEZ BRITO. (Sina, Reza)
August 26, 2021 Filing 2 CIVIL COVER SHEET filed by Plaintiffs CANDES LIQUOR, ALFREDO MARTINEZ BRITO. (Sina, Reza)
August 26, 2021 Filing 1 COMPLAINT Receipt No: ACACDC-31880735 - Fee: $402, filed by plaintiff CANDES LIQUOR, ALFREDO MARTINEZ BRITO. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A - Final Agency Decision) (Attorney Reza Sina added to party CANDES LIQUOR(pty:pla), Attorney Reza Sina added to party ALFREDO MARTINEZ BRITO(pty:pla))(Sina, Reza)

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 this case: Cande's Liquor et al v. United States of America
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Cande's Liquor
Represented By: Reza Sina
Represented By: Jeremy G. Feigenbaum
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Alfredo Martinrez Brito
Represented By: Reza Sina
Represented By: Jeremy G. Feigenbaum
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: United States of America
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]

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.


Why Is My Information Online?