Alejandro A. Morales v. Mamco, Inc. et al
| Alejandro A. Morales |
| Mamco, Inc. and Does 1 to 100, inclusive |
| 2:2023cv03503 |
| May 8, 2023 |
| US District Court for the Central District of California |
| Labor: Fair Standards |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1441 Notice of Removal |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on May 9, 2023. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 5 NOTICE RE INTRA-DISTRICT TRANSFER by Clerk of Court due to incorrect intra-district venue selected by the filer. Case is transferred to the Eastern Division. Case has been assigned to Judge Sunshine Suzanne Sykes for all further proceedings. Any matters that may be referred to a Magistrate Judge are assigned to Shashi H. Kewalramani. New Case Number 5:23-cv-823 SSS (SHKx). (ghap) |
| Filing 4 Certificate of Service filed by Defendant Mamco, Inc. re: Civil Cover Sheet (CV-71) #2 , Notice of Removal (Attorney Civil Case Opening) #1 , Notice (Other) #3 (Glaser, Joel) |
| Filing 3 Notice OF INTERESTED PARTIES filed by Defendant Mamco, Inc.. (Glaser, Joel) |
| Filing 2 CIVIL COVER SHEET filed by Defendant Mamco, Inc.. (Glaser, Joel) |
| Filing 1 NOTICE OF REMOVAL from Riverside County Superior Court, case number CVRI2301490 Receipt No: ACACDC-35275933 - Fee: $402, filed by Defendant Mamco, Inc.. (Attorney Joel P Glaser added to party Mamco, Inc.(pty:dft))(Glaser, Joel) |
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.
