Robin Riha v. The Prudential Insurance Company of America et al
| ROBIN RIHA |
| The Prudential Insurance Company of America and HCA, INC. GROUP LONG TERM DISABILITY PLAN |
| 2:2021cv08433 |
| October 25, 2021 |
| US District Court for the Central District of California |
| Fernando L Aenlle-Rocha |
| Michael R Wilner |
| Labor: E.R.I.S.A. |
| 29 U.S.C. ยง 1132 |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on December 17, 2021. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 15
ORDER DISMISSING CIVIL ACTION by Judge Fernando L. Aenlle-Rocha: In light of the Plaintiffs Notice of Settlement, the court orders the action dismissed without prejudice #14 . The court retains jurisdiction to vacate this Order and to reopen the action within sixty days from the date of this Order. This Order does not preclude the filing of a stipulation of dismissal with prejudice pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 41, which does not require approval of the court. All pending dates and deadlines are hereby vacated. (Made JS-6. Case Terminated.) (lc)
|
| Filing 14 NOTICE of Settlement filed by Plaintiff Robin Riha. (Grabarsky, Susan) |
| Filing 13 STIPULATION Extending Time to Answer the complaint as to The Prudential Insurance Company of America answer now due 12/17/2021, re Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening) #1 filed by Defendant The Prudential Insurance Company of America.(Attorney Jason A James added to party The Prudential Insurance Company of America(pty:dft))(James, Jason) |
| Filing 12 PROOF OF SERVICE Executed by Plaintiff Robin Riha, upon Defendant The Prudential Insurance Company of America served on 10/29/2021, answer due 11/19/2021. Service of the Summons and Complaint were executed upon Gabriela Sanchez, Intake Specialist of C.T. Corporation-Agent for Process in compliance with California Code of Civil Procedure by personal service.Original Summons NOT returned. (Grabarsky, Susan) |
|
Filing 11
INITIAL STANDING ORDER upon filing of the complaint by Judge Fernando L. Aenlle-Rocha. (tf)
|
| Filing 10 21 DAY Summons Issued re Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening) #1 as to Defendant HCA, Inc. Group Long Term Disability Plan. (ghap) |
| Filing 9 21 DAY Summons Issued re Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening) #1 as to Defendant The Prudential Insurance Company of America. (ghap) |
| Filing 8 Notice to Counsel Re Consent to Proceed Before a United States Magistrate Judge. (ghap) |
| Filing 7 NOTICE TO PARTIES OF COURT-DIRECTED ADR PROGRAM filed. (ghap) |
| Filing 6 NOTICE OF ASSIGNMENT to District Judge Fernando L Aenlle-Rocha and Magistrate Judge Michael R. Wilner. (ghap) |
| Filing 5 Request for Clerk to Issue Summons on Certificate/Notice of Interested Parties #3 , Civil Cover Sheet (CV-71) #2 , Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening) #1 filed by Plaintiff ROBIN RIHA. (Grabarsky, Susan) |
| Filing 4 Request for Clerk to Issue Summons on Certificate/Notice of Interested Parties #3 , Civil Cover Sheet (CV-71) #2 , Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening) #1 filed by Plaintiff ROBIN RIHA. (Grabarsky, Susan) |
| Filing 3 CERTIFICATION and NOTICE of Interested Parties filed by Plaintiff ROBIN RIHA, (Grabarsky, Susan) |
| Filing 2 CIVIL COVER SHEET filed by Plaintiff ROBIN RIHA. (Grabarsky, Susan) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT Receipt No: ACACDC-32212440 - Fee: $402, filed by Plaintiff ROBIN RIHA. (Attorney Susan B Grabarsky added to party ROBIN RIHA(pty:pla))(Grabarsky, Susan) |
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.
