Elham Asghari v. Homegoods Inc. et al
| Elham Asghari |
| Homegoods Inc. and DOES 1 through 25, Inclusive |
| 2:2022cv05660 |
| August 10, 2022 |
| US District Court for the Central District of California |
| R Gary Klausner |
| Alka Sagar |
| Civil Rights: Jobs |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1441 Notice of Removal - Employment Discrimination |
| Both |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on September 30, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 16 Receipt of Letter of Transmittal - Remand to Superior Court. (jp) |
| Filing 15 TRANSMITTAL of documents to Los Angeles County Superior Court. A certified copy of the order of remand and a copy of the docket sheet from this court was sent to Los Angeles County Superior Court. Case number: 22STCV09763. (jp) |
Filing 14
MINUTE (IN CHAMBERS) Order Remanding Action to State Court by Judge R. Gary Klausner: The Court is not satisfied that Defendant has satisfied its burden of plausibly alleging that the amount in controversy meets the jurisdictional requirement. In light of the foregoing, the action is hereby remanded to state court for all further proceedings. (Made JS-6 Case Terminated.) (jp)
|
| Filing 13 JOINT REPORT Rule 26(f) Discovery Plan filed by Defendant Homegoods Inc... (Feldman, Catherine) |
|
Filing 12
STANDING ORDER REGARDING NEWLY ASSIGNED CASES by Judge R. Gary Klausner. READ THIS ORDER CAREFULLY. IT CONTROLS THIS CASE. (jp)
|
|
Filing 11
ORDER SETTING SCHEDULING CONFERENCE by Judge R. Gary Klausner. Rule 26 Meeting Report due by 9/19/2022. Scheduling Conference set for 9/26/2022, at 9:00 AM. (jre)
|
| Filing 10 Notice to Counsel Re Consent to Proceed Before a United States Magistrate Judge. (lh) |
| Filing 9 NOTICE TO PARTIES OF COURT-DIRECTED ADR PROGRAM filed. (lh) |
| Filing 8 NOTICE OF ASSIGNMENT to District Judge R. Gary Klausner and Magistrate Judge Alka Sagar. (lh) |
| CONFORMED FILED COPY OF ANSWER to Complaint, filed by Defendant Homegoods Inc. (FILED IN LOS ANGELES COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT ON 8/9/2022 SUBMITTED ATTACHED TO NOTICE OF REMOVAL #1 )(lh) |
| CONFORMED FILED COPY OF COMPLAINT against Defendants Does, Homegoods Inc. Jury Demanded, filed by Plaintiff Elham Asghari. (FILED IN LOS ANGELES COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT ON 3/21/2022 SUBMITTED ATTACHED TO NOTICE OF REMOVAL #1 ) (lh) |
| Filing 7 CORPORATE DISCLOSURE STATEMENT filed by Defendant Homegoods Inc. (Feldman, Catherine) |
| Filing 6 Certification and Notice of Interested Parties filed by Defendant Homegoods Inc., identifying 1. Elham Asghari, Plaintiff. 2. HomeGoods, Inc., Defendant.. (Feldman, Catherine) |
| Filing 5 DECLARATION of W. Alex Koch re Notice of Removal (Attorney Civil Case Opening), #1 filed by Defendant Homegoods Inc.. (Feldman, Catherine) |
| Filing 4 DECLARATION of Joan Meltzer re Notice of Removal (Attorney Civil Case Opening), #1 filed by Defendant Homegoods Inc.. (Feldman, Catherine) |
| Filing 3 DECLARATION of Catherine S. Feldman re Notice of Removal (Attorney Civil Case Opening), #1 filed by Defendant Homegoods Inc.. (Feldman, Catherine) |
| Filing 2 CIVIL COVER SHEET filed by Defendant Homegoods Inc.. (Feldman, Catherine) |
| Filing 1 NOTICE OF REMOVAL from Superior Court, County of Los Angeles, case number 22STCV09763 Receipt No: ACACDC-33790761 - Fee: $402, filed by Defendant Homegoods Inc.. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A-B to Notice of Removal) (Attorney Catherine S Feldman added to party Homegoods Inc.(pty:dft))(Feldman, Catherine) |
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.
