Laisha G. Garcia Ramirez et al v. Ford Motor Company et al.
| Laisha Garcia Ramirez, Demri Chen and Laisha G. Garcia Ramirez |
| FORD MOTOR COMPANY and Does 1 through 10, inclusive |
| 2:2022cv03068 |
| May 6, 2022 |
| US District Court for the Central District of California |
| Percy Anderson |
| Steve Kim |
| Prop. Damage Prod. Liability |
| 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Notice of Removal - Breach of Contract |
| Both |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on June 1, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 13 Receipt of LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL - REMAND TO SUPERIOR COURT. (aco) |
| Filing 12 TRANSMITTAL of documents to Superior Court of CA, County of Los Angeles. A certified copy of the order of remand and a copy of the docket sheet from this court was sent to Superior Court of CA, County of Los Angeles. (rolm) |
| Filing 11 STATUS CONFERENCE by ZOOM by Judge Percy Anderson. Plaintiffs counsel moved for the Court to remand the action to the Los Angeles County Superior Court based on Defendants failure to adequately allege a basis for the Courts subject matter jurisdiction in the Notice of Removal. Based on Defendants failure to satisfy its burden to adequately allege a basis for the Courts subject matter jurisdiction, the Court grants Plaintiffs Motion to Remand. Accordingly, this action is hereby remanded to the Los Angeles County Superior Court, Case Number 22STCV11792, for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. (SEE DOCUMENT FOR FURTHER DETAILS.) Case Terminated. Made JS-6 (rolm) |
| Filing 10 NOTICE of Appearance filed by attorney Matthew M Proudfoot on behalf of Defendant Ford Motor Company (Proudfoot, Matthew) |
| Filing 9 SCHEDULING NOTICE by Judge Percy Anderson Status Conference by ZOOM is set for 5/10/2022 at 12:00 PM before Judge Percy Anderson. THERE IS NO PDF DOCUMENT ASSOCIATED WITH THIS ENTRY. (kss) TEXT ONLY ENTRY |
| Filing 8 Notice to Counsel Re Consent to Proceed Before a United States Magistrate Judge. (sh) |
| Filing 7 NOTICE TO PARTIES OF COURT-DIRECTED ADR PROGRAM filed. (sh) |
| Filing 6 NOTICE OF ASSIGNMENT to District Judge Percy Anderson and Magistrate Judge Steve Kim. (sh) |
| CONFORMED E-FILED COPY OF ANSWER to complaint filed by Defendant Ford Motor Company. [SUBMITTED AS ATTACHMENT NO. 2 TO THE NOTICE OF REMOVAL #1 ](sh) |
| CONFORMED E-FILE COPY OF summons and complaint against Defendants Does, Ford Motor Company. Jury Demanded., filed by Plaintiff Laisha G. Garcia Ramirez, Demri Chen. [FILED IN STATE COURT ON 04/07/2022 SUBMITTED AS ATTACHMENT NO. 1 TO THE NOTICE OF REMOVAL #1 ] (sh) |
| Filing 5 NOTICE of Interested Parties filed by Defendant FORD MOTOR COMPANY, (Proudfoot, Matthew) |
| Filing 4 NOTICE of Appearance filed by attorney Matthew M Proudfoot on behalf of Defendant FORD MOTOR COMPANY (Proudfoot, Matthew) |
| Filing 3 DECLARATION of Matthew M. Proudfoot re Notice of Removal (Attorney Civil Case Opening), #1 filed by Defendant FORD MOTOR COMPANY. (Proudfoot, Matthew) |
| Filing 2 CIVIL COVER SHEET filed by Defendant FORD MOTOR COMPANY. (Proudfoot, Matthew) |
| Filing 1 NOTICE OF REMOVAL from Los Angeles, case number 22STCV11792 Receipt No: ACACDC-33254335 - Fee: $402, filed by Defendant FORD MOTOR COMPANY. (Attachments: #1 Summons & Complaint - State Court, #2 Answer to Complaint - State Court) (Attorney Matthew M Proudfoot added to party FORD MOTOR COMPANY(pty:dft))(Proudfoot, Matthew) |
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.
