Katherine Roksandic v. American Airlines, Inc.
| Katherine Roksandic |
| American Airlines, Inc. and Does 1 through 10, inclusive |
| 2:2022cv08177 |
| November 8, 2022 |
| US District Court for the Central District of California |
| Dale S Fischer |
| Karen L Stevenson |
| Labor: Fair Standards |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1331 Fed. Question: Fair Labor Standards |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on November 16, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 9 NOTICE OF DISMISSAL filed by plaintiff Katherine Roksandic pursuant to FRCP 41a(1) as to All Defendants. (Beligan, Leah) |
| Filing 8 RESPONSE BY THE COURT TO NOTICE TO FILER OF DEFICIENCIES IN FILED DOCUMENT by Judge Dale S. Fischer. A notice of interested parties shall be filed no later than 5 days from entry of this Order. (rfi) |
| Filing 7 NOTICE OF PRO HAC VICE APPLICATION DUE for Non-Resident Attorney Michael L. Fradin. A document recently filed in this case lists you as an out-of-state attorney of record. However, the Court has not been able to locate any record that you are admitted to the Bar of this Court, and you have not filed an application to appear Pro Hac Vice in this case. Accordingly, within 5 business days of the date of this notice, you must either (1) have your local counsel file an application to appear Pro Hac Vice (Form G-64) and pay the applicable fee, or (2) complete the next section of this form and return it to the court at cacd_attyadm@cacd.uscourts.gov. You have been removed as counsel of record from the docket in this case, and you will not be added back to the docket until your Pro Hac Vice status has been resolved. (sh) |
| Filing 6 NOTICE OF DEFICIENCIES in Attorney Case Opening RE: Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening) #1 . The following error(s) was found: No Notice of Interested Parties has been filed. A Notice of Interested Parties must be filed with every partys first appearance. See Local Rule 7.1-1. Counsel must file a Notice of Interested Parties immediately. Failure to do so may be addressed by judicial action, including sanctions. See Local Rule 83-7. Other error(s) with document(s): Attachment(s): #1 Civil Cover Sheet)should not have been attached to Docket Entry No. 1. The document(s) should have been filed separately. You are not required to take any action to correct this deficiency unless the Court so directs.. (sh) |
Filing 5
STANDING ORDER FOR CASES ASSIGNED TO JUDGE DALE S. FISCHER upon filing of the complaint by Judge Dale S. Fischer. If a party would be entitled to attorneys fees, counsel are referred to the Order Re Fees found on Court's website under Judge Fischer's Procedures and Schedules contained in the Judge's Requirements tab. Read all Orders carefully. They govern this case and differ in some respects from the Local Rules. COUNSEL ARE ORDERED TO PROVIDE A MANDATORY CHAMBERS COPY OF THE COMPLAINT, NOTICE OF REMOVAL, AND ANY OTHER INITIATING DOCUMENTS. (rfi)
|
| Filing 4 Notice to Counsel Re Consent to Proceed Before a United States Magistrate Judge. (sh) |
| Filing 3 NOTICE TO PARTIES OF COURT-DIRECTED ADR PROGRAM filed. (sh) |
| Filing 2 NOTICE OF ASSIGNMENT to District Judge Dale S. Fischer and Magistrate Judge Karen L. Stevenson. (sh) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT Receipt No: ACACDC-34295495 - Fee: $402, filed by Plaintiff Katherine Roksandic. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet) (Attorney Leah M Beligan added to party Katherine Roksandic(pty:pla))(Beligan, Leah) |
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.
