Kyle Watson v. Activision Blizzard, Inc. et al
Kyle Watson |
Activision Blizzard, Inc., Reveta Bowers, Robert Corti, Hendrik Hartong III, Brian Kelly, Bobby Kotick, Barry Meyer, Robert Morgado, Peter Nolan, Dawn Ostroff and Casey Wasserman |
2:2022cv01268 |
February 24, 2022 |
US District Court for the Central District of California |
Fernando L Aenlle-Rocha |
Patricia Donahue |
John A Kronstadt |
Securities/Commodities |
Plaintiff |
Docket Report
This docket was last retrieved on March 10, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
Document Text |
---|
Filing 13 INITIAL STANDING ORDER upon filing of the complaint by Judge Fernando L. Aenlle-Rocha. (tf) |
Filing 12 ORDER TO REASSIGN CASE due to self-recusal pursuant to General Order 21-01 by Judge John A. Kronstadt. Case transferred from Judge John A. Kronstadt to the calendar of Judge Fernando L. Aenlle-Rocha for all further proceedings. Case number now reads as 2:22-cv-01268-FLA (PDx). (et) |
Filing 11 21 DAY Summons Issued re Complaint #1 as to Defendants Activision Blizzard, Inc., Reveta Bowers, Robert Corti, Hendrik Hartong III, Brian Kelly, Bobby Kotick, Barry Meyer, Robert Morgado, Peter Nolan, Dawn Ostroff, Casey Wasserman. (lom) |
Filing 10 Request for Clerk to Issue Summons on Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening) #1 , Civil Cover Sheet (CV-71) #2 filed by Plaintiff Kyle Watson. (Smith, Evan) |
Filing 9 STANDING ORDERS FOR CIVIL CASES ASSIGNED TO JUDGE JOHN A. KRONSTADT upon filing of the complaint by 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. (tj) |
Filing 8 NOTICE OF DEFICIENCIES in Request to Issue Summons RE: Summons Request #4 . The following error(s) was found: The caption of the summons must match the caption of the complaint verbatim. If the caption is too large to fit in the space provided, enter the name of the first party and then write see attached.Next, attach a face page of the complaint or a second page addendum to the Summons. For instructions on how to prepare summons, please go to the court website http://www.cacd.uscourts.gov/forms/summons-civil-action. The summons cannot be issued until this defect has been corrected. Please correct the defect and re-file your request. (rolm) |
Filing 7 Notice to Counsel Re Consent to Proceed Before a United States Magistrate Judge. (rolm) |
Filing 6 NOTICE TO PARTIES OF COURT-DIRECTED ADR PROGRAM filed. (rolm) |
Filing 5 NOTICE OF ASSIGNMENT to District Judge John A. Kronstadt and Magistrate Judge Patricia Donahue. (rolm) |
Filing 4 Request for Clerk to Issue Summons on Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening) #1 , Certificate/Notice of Interested Parties #3 , Civil Cover Sheet (CV-71) #2 filed by Plaintiff Kyle Watson. (Smith, Evan) |
Filing 3 CERTIFICATE of Interested Parties filed by Plaintiff Kyle Watson, (Smith, Evan) |
Filing 2 CIVIL COVER SHEET filed by Plaintiff Kyle Watson. (Smith, Evan) |
Filing 1 COMPLAINT Receipt No: ACACDC-32842237 - Fee: $402, filed by Plaintiff Kyle Watson. (Attorney Evan Jason Smith added to party Kyle Watson(pty:pla))(Smith, Evan) |
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.