Jordan Burgos et al v. American Honda Motor Company, Inc.
Jordan Burgos, Brian Daniels and Jose Tejada |
American Honda Motor Company, Inc. |
2:2023cv02128 |
March 21, 2023 |
US District Court for the Central District of California |
Andre Birotte |
Steve Kim |
Contract: Other |
28 U.S.C. ยง 1332 Diversity-Other Contract |
Plaintiff |
Docket Report
This docket was last retrieved on February 14, 2024. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
Document Text |
---|
Filing 13 Joint STIPULATION for Order Vacating Deadline for Defendant's Response to Complaint and Resetting Deadline to Respond to 28 Days After Filing of Consolidated Class Action Complaint filed by Defendant American Honda Motor Company, Inc.. (Attachments: #1 Proposed Order)(Cho, Darlene) |
Filing 12 Notice of Appearance or Withdrawal of Counsel: for attorney Matt Light counsel for Defendant American Honda Motor Company, Inc.. Adding Matt Light as counsel of record for Defendant American Honda Motor Co., Inc. for the reason indicated in the G-123 Notice. Filed by Defendant American Honda Motor Co., Inc.. (Attorney Matt Light added to party American Honda Motor Company, Inc.(pty:dft))(Light, Matt) |
Filing 11 Notice of Appearance or Withdrawal of Counsel: for attorney Darlene M. Cho counsel for Defendant American Honda Motor Company, Inc.. Adding Darlene M. Cho as counsel of record for Defendant American Honda Motor Co., Inc. for the reason indicated in the G-123 Notice. Filed by Defendant American Honda Motor Co., Inc.. (Attorney Darlene M. Cho added to party American Honda Motor Company, Inc.(pty:dft))(Cho, Darlene) |
Filing 10 STIPULATION Extending Time to Answer the complaint as to American Honda Motor Company, Inc. answer now due 5/25/2023, re Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening), #1 filed by Defendant American Honda Motor Company, Inc..(Attorney Amir M Nassihi added to party American Honda Motor Company, Inc.(pty:dft))(Nassihi, Amir) |
Filing 9 PROOF OF SERVICE Executed by Plaintiff Jordan Burgos, Jose Tejada, Brian Daniels, upon Defendant American Honda Motor Company, Inc. served on 4/4/2023, answer due 4/25/2023. Service of the Summons and Complaint were executed upon Registered Agent in compliance with Federal Rules of Civil Procedure by service on a domestic corporation, unincorporated association, or public entity.Original Summons NOT returned. (Greenstone, Mark) |
Filing 8 21 DAY Summons Issued re Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening), #1 as to Defendant American Honda Motor Company, Inc.. (sh) |
Filing 7 Notice to Counsel Re Consent to Proceed Before a United States Magistrate Judge. (sh) |
Filing 6 NOTICE TO PARTIES OF COURT-DIRECTED ADR PROGRAM filed. (sh) |
Filing 5 NOTICE OF ASSIGNMENT to District Judge Andre Birotte Jr and Magistrate Judge Steve Kim. (sh) |
Filing 4 NOTICE of Interested Parties filed by Plaintiffs Jordan Burgos, Brian Daniels, Jose Tejada, (Greenstone, Mark) |
Filing 3 Request for Clerk to Issue Summons on Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening), #1 filed by Plaintiffs Jordan Burgos, Brian Daniels, Jose Tejada. (Greenstone, Mark) |
Filing 2 CIVIL COVER SHEET filed by Plaintiffs Jordan Burgos, Brian Daniels, Jose Tejada. (Greenstone, Mark) |
Filing 1 COMPLAINT Receipt No: ACACDC-34998143 - Fee: $402, filed by Plaintiffs Jordan Burgos, Jose Tejada, Brian Daniels. (Attorney Mark Samuel Greenstone added to party Jordan Burgos(pty:pla), Attorney Mark Samuel Greenstone added to party Brian Daniels(pty:pla), Attorney Mark Samuel Greenstone added to party Jose Tejada(pty:pla))(Greenstone, Mark) |
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.