Eric Doffoney v. United States of America et al
| Eric Doffoney |
| United States of America by and through the United States Postal Service, 1-50, inclusive DOES, United States of America and Does 1-50, inclusive |
| 2:2022cv07209 |
| October 4, 2022 |
| US District Court for the Central District of California |
| Maria A Audero |
| Otis D Wright |
| Motor Vehicle |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1331 Fed. Question: Tort Action |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on October 27, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 14 NOTICE of Voluntary Dismissal filed by plaintiff Eric Doffoney. Dismissal is without prejudice. (Richie, Darren) |
| Filing 13 PROOF OF SERVICE Executed by Plaintiff Eric Doffoney, upon Defendant Service of the Summons and Complaint were Service was executed in compliance with Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Due diligence declaration NOT attached. Registered or certified mail return receipt NOT attached. (Richie, Darren) |
| Filing 12 PROOF OF SERVICE Executed by Plaintiff Eric Doffoney, upon Defendant United States of America served on 10/12/2022, answer due 12/12/2022. Service of the Summons and Complaint were The officer agency or corporation was NOT served. Service was executed in compliance with Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Due diligence declaration NOT attached. Registered or certified mail return receipt NOT attached. (Richie, Darren) |
| Filing 11 PROOF OF SERVICE Executed by Plaintiff Eric Doffoney, upon Defendant United States of America served on 10/11/2022, answer due 12/12/2022. Service of the Summons and Complaint were executed upon the United States Attorneys Office by delivering a copy to Richard Childress. Executed upon the Attorney Generals Office of the United States by delivering a copy to Jeremi Six. The officer agency or corporation was NOT served. Service was executed in compliance with Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Due diligence declaration NOT attached. Registered or certified mail return receipt NOT attached. (Richie, Darren) |
Filing 10
MINUTE ORDER (IN CHAMBERS) by Judge Otis D. Wright, II. This action has been assigned to the calendar of Judge Otis D. Wright II. Counsel are STRONGLY encouraged to review the Central District's website for additional information. See minute order for details. (lom)
|
| Filing 9 60 DAY Summons Issued re Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening) #1 as to Defendants United States of America. (Attachments: #1 Summons, #2 Summons) (lh) |
| Filing 8 Notice to Counsel Re Consent to Proceed Before a United States Magistrate Judge. (lh) |
| Filing 7 NOTICE TO PARTIES OF COURT-DIRECTED ADR PROGRAM filed. (lh) |
| Filing 6 NOTICE OF ASSIGNMENT to District Judge Otis D. Wright, II and Magistrate Judge Maria A. Audero. (lh) |
| Filing 5 CIVIL COVER SHEET filed by Plaintiff Eric Doffoney. (Richie, Darren) |
| Filing 4 Request for Clerk to Issue Summons on Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening) #1 filed by Plaintiff Eric Doffoney. (Richie, Darren) |
| Filing 3 Request for Clerk to Issue Summons on Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening) #1 filed by Plaintiff Eric Doffoney. (Richie, Darren) |
| Filing 2 Request for Clerk to Issue Summons on Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening) #1 filed by Plaintiff Eric Doffoney. (Richie, Darren) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT Receipt No: ACACDC-34094231 - Fee: $402, filed by Plaintiff Eric Doffoney. (Attorney Darren Michael Richie added to party Eric Doffoney(pty:pla))(Richie, Darren) |
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.
