Alva Dennis Lytton v. Southern California Regional Rail Authority et al
ALVA DENNIS LYTTON |
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA REGIONAL RAIL AUTHORITY (aka SCRRA METROLINK), DOES 1 to 10, inclusive, Southern California Regional Rail Authority, National Railroad Passenger Corporation, SCRRA Metrolink and Amtrak |
NATIONAL RAILROAD PASSENGER CORPORATION (aka AMTRAK) |
2:2023cv03166 |
April 26, 2023 |
US District Court for the Central District of California |
Jacqueline Chooljian |
Wesley L Hsu |
Labor: Other |
28 U.S.C. § 1441 Notice of Removal - Labor/Mgmnt. Relations |
Plaintiff |
Docket Report
This docket was last retrieved on June 23, 2023. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
Document Text |
---|
|
Filing 18 NOTICE OF CLERICAL ERROR: Due to clerical error Re: Text Only Entry re SCHEDULING NOTICE AND (IN CHAMBERS) ORDER VACATING SCHEDULING CONFERENCE 17 was incorrectly docketed into this case. (hc) |
|
Filing 16 NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION to Stay Case pending Arbitration , NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION to Compel Arbitration filed by Defendants National Railroad Passenger Corporation, Southern California Regional Rail Authority. Motion set for hearing on 7/21/2023 at 01:30 PM before Judge Wesley L. Hsu. (Attachments: #1 Memorandum OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANTS SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA REGIONAL RAIL AUTHORITY (AKA SCRAA METROLINK); NATIONAL RAILROAD PASSENGER CORPORATION (AKA AMTRAK)S MOTION TO COMPEL ARBITRATION AND STAY PROCEEDINGS, #2 Declaration OF TIFFANY BAYNARD IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANTS MOTION TO COMPEL ARBITRATION AND STAY PROCEEDINGS, #3 Exhibit A to Baynard Declaration, #4 Exhibit B to Baynard Declaration, #5 Declaration OF ZEESHAN KABANI IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANTS MOTION TO COMPEL ARBITRATION AND STAY PROCEEDINGS, #6 Exhibit A to Kabani Declaration, #7 Proposed Order GRANTING DEFENDANTS MOTION TO COMPEL ARBITRATION AND STAY PROCEEDINGS) (Kabani, Zeeshan) |
|
|
|
Filing 12 PROOF OF SERVICE filed by Defendants National Railroad Passenger Corporation, Southern California Regional Rail Authority, re Notice to Counsel Re: Consent to Proceed before a US Magistrate Judge - optional html form #9 , Initial Order Setting R26 Scheduling Conference - form only, #11 , Initial Order upon Filing of Complaint - form only,, #10 , Notice of Assignment to United States Judges(CV-18) - optional html form #7 served on 04/27/2023. (Charles, Brandie) |
|
|
Filing 9 Notice to Counsel Re Consent to Proceed Before a United States Magistrate Judge. (et) |
Filing 8 NOTICE TO PARTIES OF COURT-DIRECTED ADR PROGRAM filed. (et) |
Filing 7 NOTICE OF ASSIGNMENT to District Judge Dale S. Fischer and Magistrate Judge Patricia Donahue. (et) |
NON-CONFORMED COPY OF FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT against Defendants Does 1 to 10, inclusive, National Railroad Passenger Corporation, Southern California Regional Rail Authority amending Complaint - (Discovery), filed by Plaintiff Alva Dennis Lytton. [SUBMITTED ATTACHED TO EXHIBIT A TO NOTICE OF REMOVAL #1 ]. (et) |
CONFORMED E-FILED COPY OF COMPLAINT against Defendants National Railroad Passenger Corporation, Southern California Regional Rail Authority, Does 1 to 10, inclusive. Jury Demanded., filed by Plaintiff Alva Dennis Lytton. [FILED IN STATE COURT ON 3/16/2023 SUBMITTED ATTACHED TO EXHIBIT A TO NOTICE OF REMOVAL #1 ]. (et) |
CONFORMED E-FILED COPY OF ANSWER TO COMPLAINT filed by Defendants National Railroad Passenger Corporation, Southern California Regional Rail Authority. [FILED IN STATE COURT ON 4/26/2023 SUBMITTED ATTACHED TO EXHIBIT B TO NOTICE OF REMOVAL #1 ]. (et) |
Filing 6 PROOF OF SERVICE filed by Defendants NATIONAL RAILROAD PASSENGER CORPORATION (aka AMTRAK), SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA REGIONAL RAIL AUTHORITY (aka SCRRA METROLINK), re Civil Cover Sheet (CV-71) #2 , Notice of Removal (Attorney Civil Case Opening),, #1 , Certificate/Notice of Interested Parties, #3 , Notice of Related Case(s) #4 , Corporate Disclosure Statement, #5 served on 04/26/2023. (Charles, Brandie) |
Filing 5 CORPORATE DISCLOSURE STATEMENT filed by Movant NATIONAL RAILROAD PASSENGER CORPORATION (aka AMTRAK), Defendant SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA REGIONAL RAIL AUTHORITY (aka SCRRA METROLINK) identifying No corporate parent as Corporate Parent. (Charles, Brandie) |
Filing 4 NOTICE of Related Case(s) filed by Defendants NATIONAL RAILROAD PASSENGER CORPORATION (aka AMTRAK), SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA REGIONAL RAIL AUTHORITY (aka SCRRA METROLINK). Related Case(s): There are no related cases (Charles, Brandie) |
Filing 3 NOTICE of Interested Parties filed by Defendants NATIONAL RAILROAD PASSENGER CORPORATION (aka AMTRAK), SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA REGIONAL RAIL AUTHORITY (aka SCRRA METROLINK), identifying Plaintiff Alva Dennis Lytton; National Railroad Passenger Corporation (Amtrak); Southern California Regional Rail Authority (Metrolink).. (Charles, Brandie) |
Filing 2 CIVIL COVER SHEET filed by Movant NATIONAL RAILROAD PASSENGER CORPORATION (aka AMTRAK), Defendant SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA REGIONAL RAIL AUTHORITY (aka SCRRA METROLINK). (Charles, Brandie) |
Filing 1 NOTICE OF REMOVAL from Los Angeles Superior Court, case number 23STCV05900 Receipt No: BCACDC-35208893 - Fee: $402, filed by Defendants NATIONAL RAILROAD PASSENGER CORPORATION (aka AMTRAK), SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA REGIONAL RAIL AUTHORITY (aka SCRRA METROLINK). (Attachments: #1 Declaration of Zeeshan Kabani) (Attorney Brandie N Charles added to party NATIONAL RAILROAD PASSENGER CORPORATION (aka AMTRAK)(pty:bkmov), Attorney Brandie N Charles added to party SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA REGIONAL RAIL AUTHORITY (aka SCRRA METROLINK)(pty:dft))(Charles, Brandie) |
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.