Sandeep Chauhan v. Google LLC
| Sandeep Roy Chauhan |
| Google LLC |
| 2:2022cv08185 |
| November 8, 2022 |
| US District Court for the Central District of California |
| Percy Anderson |
| Charles F Eick |
| John E McDermott |
| Mark C Scarsi |
| Civil Rights: Other |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1331 Federal Question: Other Civil Rights |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on December 7, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 15 JUDGMENT by Judge Mark C. Scarsi: Pursuant to the Court's Order Dismissing Case for Improper Venue #14 , it is ordered,adjudged, and decreed that this case is dismissed without prejudice for improper venue. Plaintiff shall take nothing from this action. (MD JS-6, Case Terminated). (lc) Modified on 12/7/2022 (lc). |
Filing 14
ORDER DISMISSING CASE FOR IMPROPER VENUE by Judge Mark C. Scarsi; The Court ordered Plaintiff to show cause why the case should not be dismissedor transferred to the United States District Court for the Northern District of California pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1406(a). (OSC, ECF No. 13.) The Court warned that "[f]ailure to timely and satisfactorily respond will result in dismissal of this case without prejudice for improper venue." (Id. at 2.) Plaintiff did not file a timely response. The Court directs the Clerk to enter judgment and close the case. (lc)
|
| Filing 13 MINUTE ORDER (IN CHAMBERS) ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE Judge Mark C. Scarsi. Plaintiff is ordered to show cause why the action should not be dismissed or transferred to the United States District Court for the Northern District of California pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1406(a). Plaintiff shall respond in writing within 14 days. Failure to timely and satisfactorily respond will result in dismissal of this case without prejudice for improper venue. (lom) |
|
Filing 12
ORDER ON REQUEST TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS (NON-PRISONER CASE) #2 by Judge Mark C. Scarsi. The Court has reviewed the Request to Proceed In Forma Pauperis (the "Request") and the documents submitted with it. On the question of indigency, the Court finds that the party who filed the Request: has not submitted enough information for the Court to tell if the filer is able to pay the filing fees. This is what is missing: Plaintiff has not provided enough information about his past employment earnings in response to question l(b). IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that: Ruling on the Request is POSTPONED for 30 days so that the filer may provide additional information. (lom)
|
| Filing 11 TEXT ONLY (IN CHAMBERS) NOTICE TO PRO SE LITIGANTS by Judge Mark C. Scarsi: Although Plaintiff is proceeding pro se, i.e., without legal representation, she/he nonetheless is required to comply with Court orders, the Local Rules, and the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. See C.D. Cal. L.R. 83-2.2.3. The Local Rules are available on the Court's website, http://www.cacd.uscourts.gov/court-procedures/ local-rules. The Court cannot provide legal advice to any party, including pro se litigants, i.e., parties who are not represented by a lawyer. There is a free "Pro Se Clinic" that can provide information and guidance about many aspects of civil litigation in this Court. The Court notes that a party to this lawsuit does not have a lawyer. Parties in court without a lawyer are called "pro se litigants." These parties often face special challenges in federal court. Public Counsel runs a free Federal Pro Se Clinic where pro se litigants can get information and guidance. The Clinic is located at the Roybal Federal Building and Courthouse, 255 East Temple Street, Los Angeles, CA 90012 (note that the clinic may not be open for in-person appointments during the pandemic). Pro se litigants must call or submit an on-line application to request services as follows: on-line applications can be submitted at http://prose.cacd.uscourts.gov/los-angeles, or call (213) 385-2977, ext. 270. Pro se litigants may submit documents for filing through the Court's Electronic Document Submission System (EDSS) instead of mailing or bringing documents to the Clerk's Office. Only internet access and an e-mail address are required. Documents are submitted in PDF format through an online portal on the Court's website. To access EDSS and for additional information, visit the Court's website at https://apps.cacd.uscourts.gov/edss. Attorneys may not use EDSS to submit documents on behalf of their clients. Attorneys are required by the local rules to file documents electronically using the Court's CM/ECF System. THERE IS NO PDF DOCUMENT ASSOCIATED WITH THIS ENTRY. (smo) |
|
Filing 10
INITIAL STANDING ORDER FOR CIVIL CASES ASSIGNED TO JUDGE MARK C. SCARSI upon filing of the complaint by Judge Mark C. Scarsi. (smo)
|
|
Filing 9
ORDER RE TRANSFER PURSUANT TO GENERAL ORDER 21-01-Related Case- filed. Related Case No: 2:22-cv-08036 MCS(Ex). Case transferred from Judge Percy Anderson and Magistrate Judge John E. McDermott to Judge Mark C. Scarsi and Magistrate Judge Charles F. Eick for all further proceedings. The case number will now reflect the initials of the transferee Judge 2:22-cv-08185 MCS(Ex). Signed by Judge Mark C. Scarsi (rn)
|
|
Filing 8
STANDING ORDER by Judge Percy Anderson. READ THIS ORDER CAREFULLY. IT CONTROLS THE CASE AND DIFFERS IN SOME RESPECTS FROM THE LOCAL RULES. [See Order for details and deadlines.] (es)
|
|
Filing 7
NOTICE OF DISCREPANCY AND ORDER by Judge Percy Anderson, ORDERING Exhibit-1, Exhibit-2 submitted by Plaintiff Sandeep Roy Chauhan received on 11/14/2022 is not to be filed but instead rejected. Denial based on: Unclear what document(s) the exhibits should be attached to. (aco)
|
| Filing 6 Notice to Counsel Re Consent to Proceed Before a United States Magistrate Judge. (sh) |
| Filing 5 NOTICE TO PARTIES OF COURT-DIRECTED ADR PROGRAM filed. (sh) |
| Filing 4 NOTICE OF ASSIGNMENT to District Judge Percy Anderson and Magistrate Judge John E. McDermott. (sh) |
| Filing 3 CERTIFICATION AND NOTICE of Interested Parties filed by Plaintiff Sandeep Roy Chauhan, (sh) |
| Filing 2 REQUEST to Proceed In Forma Pauperis, Declaration in Support filed by Plaintiff Sandeep Roy Chauhan. (sh) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT against Defendants Google LLC.Case assigned to Judge Percy Anderson for all further proceedings. Discovery referred to Magistrate Judge John E. McDermott. Jury Demanded., filed by Plaintiff Sandeep Roy Chauhan. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet, #2 Summons) (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: Sandeep Chauhan v. Google LLC | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Plaintiff: Sandeep Roy Chauhan | |
| 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 ] |
| Defendant: Google LLC | |
| 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.
