Brian Simmons v. The Coca Cola Company
| Brian Simmons |
| Coca-Cola Company The, The Coca Cola Company and DOE |
| 2:2021cv07561 |
| September 22, 2021 |
| US District Court for the Central District of California |
| Pedro V Castillo |
| John A Kronstadt |
| Civil Rights: Jobs |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1441 |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on April 12, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 13
ORDER RE JOINT STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME TO RESPOND TO INITIAL COMPLAINT (DKT. #12 ) by Judge John A. Kronstadt, the Stipulation is APPROVED. Defendants deadline to respond to the Complaint is continued from 10/29/2021 to 11/29/2021. (jp)
|
| Filing 12 Joint STIPULATION for Extension of Time to File Answer to 11/29/2021 filed by Defendant The Coca Cola Company. (Attachments: #1 Proposed Order)(Ly, Anthony) |
|
Filing 11
ORDER SETTING RULE 16(b)/26(f) SCHEDULING CONFERENCE by Judge John A. Kronstadt. Counsel shall file a Joint Report consistent with this Order. A hearing is not necessary and, therefore, the matter is taken under submission. Upon review of the Joint Report, a scheduling order will be issued. Rule 26 Meeting Report due by 12/10/2021. (jre)
|
| Filing 10 STANDING ORDERS FOR CIVIL CASES ASSIGNED TO 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. (jre) |
| Filing 9 STIPULATION Extending Time to Answer the complaint as to The Coca Cola Company answer now due 10/29/2021, re Complaint - (Discovery) filed by Defendant The Coca Cola Company.(Ly, Anthony) |
| 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 John A. Kronstadt and Magistrate Judge Pedro V. Castillo. (jtil) |
| CONFORMED COPY OF COMPLAINT filed by Plaintiff Brian Simmons in Los Angeles Superior Court on 7/7/2021, attached as Exhibit A. (jtil) |
| Filing 5 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE filed by Defendant Coca-Cola Company The, re Certificate/Notice of Interested Parties #4 , Civil Cover Sheet (CV-71) #2 , Corporate Disclosure Statement #3 , Notice of Removal (Attorney Civil Case Opening), #1 served on September 22, 2021. (Behnia, Sophia) |
| Filing 4 NOTICE of Interested Parties filed by Defendant Coca-Cola Company The, (Behnia, Sophia) |
| Filing 3 CORPORATE DISCLOSURE STATEMENT filed by Defendant Coca-Cola Company The (Behnia, Sophia) |
| Filing 2 CIVIL COVER SHEET filed by Defendant Coca-Cola Company The. (Behnia, Sophia) |
| Filing 1 NOTICE OF REMOVAL from Los Angeles Superior Court, case number 21STCV24965 Receipt No: ACACDC-32024379 - Fee: $402, filed by Defendant Coca-Cola Company The. (Attachments: #1 Declaration Declaration of Sophia Behnia ISO Removal to Federal Court) (Attorney Sophia Behnia added to party Coca-Cola Company The(pty:dft))(Behnia, Sophia) |
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.
