Christopher Alcaraz v. Ford Motor Company et al
Defendant: Does 1 through 20, inclusive
Petitioner: Christopher Alcaraz and FORD MOTOR COMPANY
Case Number: 2:2021cv08456
Filed: October 26, 2021
Court: US District Court for the Central District of California
Presiding Judge: Paul L Abrams
Referring Judge: Dale S Fischer
Nature of Suit: Contract: Other
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Notice of Removal - Breach of Contract
Jury Demanded By: Both
Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on February 7, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
February 7, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 20 ORDER by Judge Dale S. Fischer GRANTING Plaintiff's Request to Extend Time for Filing a Request to Vacate the Order of Dismissal #19 to 3/22/2022. (jp)
February 4, 2022 Filing 19 REQUEST to Vacate Order Dismissing the Case Without Prejudice, or in the Alternative, to Extend Time on Filing Request to Vacate Order of Dismissal as the Settlement Has Not Completed and is Pending filed by Plaintiff Christopher Alcaraz. (Attachments: #1 Proposed Order) (Attorney Anna H Galaviz added to party Christopher Alcaraz(pty:pla)) (Galaviz, Anna)
January 27, 2022 Filing 18 RESPONSE BY THE COURT TO NOTICE TO FILER OF DEFICIENCIES IN ELECTRONICALLY FILED DOCUMENTS by Deputy Clerk of Court. The document is stricken and counsel is ordered to file an amended or corrected document by 2/4/2022. #16 and #17 (rfi)
January 26, 2022 Filing 17 NOTICE TO FILER OF DEFICIENCIES in Electronically Filed Documents RE: Notice (Other) #16 . The following error(s) was/were found: (1) Incorrect event selected. Correct event to be used is: Vacate - under Category - Applications/Ex Parte Applications/Motions/Petitions/Requests. (2) Proposed Document was not submitted as separate attachment. Other error(s) with document(s): (3) Proposed Order shall be filed as separate attachment to the e-filed "REQUEST and/or NOTICE OF LODGING" and e-mailed to Judge Fischer generic email addresses a WordPerfect or Microsoft Word version of the document. In response to this notice, the Court may: (1) order an amended or correct document to be filed; (2) order the document stricken; or (3) take other action as the Court deems appropriate. You need not take any action in response to this notice unless and until the Court directs you to do so. (jp)
January 21, 2022 Filing 16 **STRICKEN** SEE #18 NOTICE Request to Vacate Order Dismissing the Case Without Prejudice filed by Plaintiff Christopher Alcaraz. (Barry, David) Modified on 1/27/2022 (rfi).
November 23, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 15 TEXT ONLY ENTRY (IN CHAMBERS): ORDER DISMISSING CASE DUE TO SETTLEMENT by Judge Dale S. Fischer. The Court has been advised that this action has been settled. Accordingly, it is ordered that the action is dismissed without prejudice. The Court retains jurisdiction for 60 days to vacate this Order and to reopen the action on a showing of good cause that the settlement has not been completed and further proceedings are necessary. THERE IS NO PDF DOCUMENT ASSOCIATED WITH THIS ENTRY. (rfi) TEXT ONLY ENTRY
November 22, 2021 Filing 14 JOINT REPORT Rule 26(f) Discovery Plan ; estimated length of trial not applicable, filed by Plaintiff Christopher Alcaraz.. (Barry, David)
November 22, 2021 Filing 13 JOINT REPORT Rule 26(f) Discovery Plan filed by Defendant Ford Motor Company.. (Ihara, Karyn)
November 19, 2021 Filing 12 Joint STIPULATION to Continue Scheduling Conference from December 6, 2021 to February 4, 2022 filed by Plaintiff Christopher Alcaraz. (Attachments: #1 Proposed Order)(Barry, David)
October 28, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 11 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 12/6/2021 at 11:00 AM before Judge Dale S. Fischer. (rfi)
October 28, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 10 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. (rfi)
October 28, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 9 ORDER TO REASSIGN CASE due to self-recusal pursuant to General Order 21-01 by Judge Christina A. Snyder. Case transferred from Judge Christina A. Snyder to the calendar of Judge Dale S. Fischer for all further proceedings. Case number now reads as 2:21-cv-08456 DSF(PLAx). (rn)
October 27, 2021 Filing 8 Notice to Counsel Re Consent to Proceed Before a United States Magistrate Judge. (car)
October 27, 2021 Filing 7 NOTICE TO PARTIES OF COURT-DIRECTED ADR PROGRAM filed. (car)
October 27, 2021 Filing 6 NOTICE OF ASSIGNMENT to District Judge Christina A. Snyder and Magistrate Judge Paul L. Abrams. (car)
October 26, 2021 CONFORMED COPY OF COMPLAINT against Defendants Does 1 through 20, inclusive, Ford Motor Company. Jury Demanded, filed by Plaintiff Christopher Alcaraz. Filed in State Court on 9/21/2021 Submitted with Attachment 1 to Notice of Removal #1 (car)
October 26, 2021 CONFORMED COPY OF ANSWER to Complaint - (Discovery) filed by Defendant Ford Motor Company. Filed in State Court on 10/12/2021 Submitted with Attachment 1 to Notice of Removal #1 (car)
October 26, 2021 Filing 5 NOTICE OF FILING STATE COURT ANSWER TO PLAINTIFFS COMPLAINT BY DEFENDANT FORD MOTOR COMPANY; AND DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL filed by Defendant FORD MOTOR COMPANY. (Ihara, Karyn)
October 26, 2021 Filing 4 CORPORATE DISCLOSURE STATEMENT filed by Movant FORD MOTOR COMPANY (Ihara, Karyn)
October 26, 2021 Filing 3 CERTIFICATE of Interested Parties filed by Defendant FORD MOTOR COMPANY, (Ihara, Karyn)
October 26, 2021 Filing 2 CIVIL COVER SHEET filed by Movant FORD MOTOR COMPANY. (Ihara, Karyn)
October 26, 2021 Filing 1 NOTICE OF REMOVAL from State of California- County of Los Angeles, case number 21STCV34714 Receipt No: ACACDC-32216935 - Fee: $402, filed by Defendant FORD MOTOR COMPANY. (Attachments: #1 Declaration Of Karyn L. Ihara) (Attorney Karyn L Ihara added to party FORD MOTOR COMPANY(pty:bkmov))(Ihara, Karyn)

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: Christopher Alcaraz v. Ford Motor Company et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Petitioner: Christopher Alcaraz
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 ]
Petitioner: FORD MOTOR COMPANY
Represented By: Karyn L Ihara
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: Does 1 through 20, inclusive
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?