Maria Flores v. Metal Improvement Company, LLC et al
| Maria Flores |
| Metal Improvement Company, LLC, DOES 1 through 50 and Does 1-50 |
| 2:2022cv08231 |
| November 10, 2022 |
| US District Court for the Central District of California |
| Andre Birotte |
| Michael R Wilner |
| 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 January 11, 2024. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 9
ORDER SETTING RULE 16(b)/26(f) SCHEDULING CONFERENCE by Judge Andre Birotte Jr. Counsel shall file a Joint Report consistent with this Order. Scheduling Conference set for 1/27/2023 at 10:00 AM before Judge Andre Birotte Jr. (hc)
|
|
Filing 8
CIVIL STANDING ORDER upon filing of the complaint by Judge Andre Birotte Jr. (kmh)
|
| Filing 7 Notice to Counsel Re Consent to Proceed Before a United States Magistrate Judge. (et) |
| Filing 6 NOTICE TO PARTIES OF COURT-DIRECTED ADR PROGRAM filed. (et) |
| Filing 5 NOTICE OF ASSIGNMENT to District Judge Andre Birotte Jr and Magistrate Judge Michael R. Wilner. (et) |
| CONFORMED E-FILED COPY OF ANSWER TO COMPLAINT filed by Defendant Metal Improvement Company, LLC. [FILED IN STATE COURT ON 11/10/2022 SUBMITTED ATTACHED TO EXHIBIT J AS ATTACHMENT NO. 11 TO NOTICE OF REMOVAL #1 ].(et) |
| CONFORMED E-FILED COPY OF PROOF OF SERVICE OF SUMMONS AND COMPLAINT Executed by Plaintiff Maria Flores, upon Defendant Metal Improvement Company, LLC served on 10/12/2022, answer due 11/2/2022. Service of the Summons and Complaint were executed upon CT Corporation System-Daisy Montenegro, Process Specialist-Person Authorized to Accept Service of Process in compliance with statute not specified by personal service.Original Summons NOT returned. [FILED IN STATE COURT ON 10/14/2022 SUBMITTED ATTACHED TO EXHIBIT I AS ATTACHMENT NO. 10 TO NOTICE OF REMOVAL #1 ]. (et) |
| CONFORMED E-FILED COPY OF COMPLAINT against Defendants Does 1 through 50, Metal Improvement Company, LLC. Jury Demanded., filed by Plaintiff Maria Flores. [FILED IN STATE COURT ON 10/7/2022 SUBMITTED ATTACHED TO EXHIBIT A AS ATTACHMENT NO. 2 TO NOTICE OF REMOVAL #1 ]. (et) |
| Filing 4 CORPORATE DISCLOSURE STATEMENT filed by Defendant Metal Improvement Company, LLC identifying Curtiss-Wright Corporation as Corporate Parent. (Ponce, Sergio) |
| Filing 3 NOTICE of Interested Parties filed by Defendant Metal Improvement Company, LLC, (Ponce, Sergio) |
| Filing 2 CIVIL COVER SHEET filed by Defendant Metal Improvement Company, LLC. (Ponce, Sergio) |
| Filing 1 NOTICE OF REMOVAL from Los Angeles County Superior Court, case number 22STCV33049 Receipt No: ACACDC-34310505 - Fee: $402, filed by Defendant Metal Improvement Company, LLC. (Attachments: #1 Declaration of Sergio C. Ponce, #2 Exhibit A - Complaint, #3 Exhibit B - Civil Case Cover Sheet, #4 Exhibit C - Summons, #5 Exhibit D - ADR Package, #6 Exhibit E - First Amended General Order, #7 Exhibit F - Voluntary Efficient Litigation Stipulation Packet, #8 Exhibit G - Notice of Case Assignment, #9 Exhibit H - Notice of Case Management Conference, #10 Exhibit I - Proof of Personal Service, #11 Exhibit J - Answer, #12 Declaration of Paul Ferdenzi, #13 Exhibit K - Defendant's Operating Agreement, #14 Exhibit L - Curtiss-Wright LLC Certificate of Formation, #15 Exhibit M - Curtiss-Wright LLC's Operating Agreement) (Attorney Sergio Clifford Ponce added to party Metal Improvement Company, LLC(pty:dft))(Ponce, Sergio) |
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.
