Juan Enrique Lopez v. Jim Robertson
| Juan Enrique Lopez |
| Jim Robertson |
| 2:2022cv02587 |
| April 18, 2022 |
| US District Court for the Central District of California |
| Steve Kim |
| Mark C Scarsi |
| Prisoner: Civil Rights |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State) |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on March 20, 2023. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 8 NOTICE OF LODGING filed Notice of Lodging of Documents re NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION to Dismiss Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus; Memorandum of Points and Authorities #7 (Attachments: #1 Lodged Doc.#1, #2 Lodgd Doc.#2, #3 Lodged Doc.#3, #4 Lodged Doc.#4)(Ladner, Nancy) |
| Filing 7 NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION to Dismiss Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus; Memorandum of Points and Authorities filed by respondent Jim Robertson. (Ladner, Nancy) |
| Filing 6 NOTICE of Appearance filed by attorney Nancy Lii Ladner on behalf of Respondent Jim Robertson (Attorney Nancy Lii Ladner added to party Jim Robertson(pty:res))(Ladner, Nancy) |
Filing 5
ORDER REQUIRING RESPONSE TO PETITION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS by Magistrate Judge Steve Kim. Pursuant to the Agreement on Acceptance of Service between the Clerk of Court and the California Attorney Generals Office, this Notice constitutes service under Fed. R. Civ. P. 4. (SEE ORDER FOR DETAILS). (Attachments: #1 Petition, #2 Consent Form, #3 Local Rules Digest) (clee)
|
|
Filing 4
MINUTE (IN CHAMBERS) ORDER RE: REQUEST TO PROCEED WITHOUT PREPAYMENT OF FILING FEES by Magistrate Judge Steve Kim. The request is GRANTED. (hr)
|
| Filing 3 NOTICE OF REFERENCE to a U.S. Magistrate Judge. This case has been assigned to the calendar of the Honorable District Judge Mark C. Scarsi and referred to Magistrate Judge Steve Kim, who is authorized to consider preliminary matters and conduct all further hearings as may be appropriate or necessary. Pursuant to Local Rule 83-2.4, the Court must be notified within five (5) days of any address change. See notice for additional details. (Attachments: #1 CV-111 Letter Re Habeas Corpus Petition) (sh) |
| Filing 2 ELECTION REGARDING CONSENT to Proceed before a United States Magistrate Judge Declined, in accordance with Title 28 Section 636c filed by Petitioner Juan Enrique Lopez. The Petitioner does not consent. (sh) |
| Filing 1 PETITION for Writ of Habeas Corpus by a Person In State Custody (28:2254) Case assigned to Judge Mark C. Scarsi and referred to Magistrate Judge Steve Kim., filed by Petitioner Juan Enrique Lopez. (sh) |
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
| Search for this case: Juan Enrique Lopez v. Jim Robertson | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Petitioner: Juan Enrique Lopez | |
| 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 ] |
| Respondent: Jim Robertson | |
| Represented By: | Nancy Lii Ladner |
| 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.
