David Mottahedeh v. Target Corporation et al
Plaintiff: David Mottahedeh
Defendant: Target Corporation and Does 1 through 50, inclusive
Case Number: 2:2023cv05284
Filed: July 3, 2023
Court: US District Court for the Central District of California
Presiding Judge: Charles F Eick
Referring Judge: Rozella A Oliver
2 Judge: Mark C Scarsi
Nature of Suit: P.I.: Other
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 1441 Notice of Removal - Personal Injury
Jury Demanded By: Both
Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on January 8, 2024. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
August 28, 2023 Filing 11 Notice PLAINTIFFS DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL AND POSTING JURY FEES filed by DAVID MOTTAHEDEH David Mottahedeh. (Heidari, Saman)
August 25, 2023 Filing 10 JOINT REPORT Rule 26(f) Discovery Plan ; estimated length of trial 5-7 days, filed by Defendant Target Corporation.. (Halm, David)
July 17, 2023 Opinion or Order Filing 9 ORDER SETTING SCHEDULING CONFERENCE by Judge Mark C. Scarsi. Scheduling Conference set for 9/11/2023 at 10:00 AM before Judge Mark C. Scarsi. (smo)
July 17, 2023 Opinion or Order Filing 8 INITIAL STANDING ORDER FOR CIVIL CASES ASSIGNED TO JUDGE MARK C. SCARSI upon filing of the complaint by Judge Mark C. Scarsi. (smo)
July 14, 2023 Filing 7 NOTICE OF REASSIGNMENT of MJDAP case from Magistrate Judge Rozella A. Oliver to Judge Mark C. Scarsi for all further proceedings. Any discovery matters that may be referred to a Magistrate Judge are assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Charles F. Eick. The case number will now reflect the initials of the transferee Judges 2:23-cv-05284 MCS(Ex). (rn)
July 13, 2023 Filing 6 ELECTION REGARDING CONSENT to Proceed before a United States Magistrate Judge Declined, in accordance with Title 28 Section 636c filed by Defendant Target Corporation. The Defendant does not consent. (Halm, David)
July 13, 2023 Filing 5 NOTICE OF SERVICE filed by Defendant Target Corporation, re Notice to Counsel (CV-20a) Magistrate Judge Direct Assignment Program - optional html form #2 served on July 11, 2023. (Halm, David)
July 10, 2023 Filing 4 REMINDER NOTICE re Magistrate Judge Direct Assignment Program. Each party must file form CV-11C within the consent deadlines pursuant to L.R. 73-2. Additionally, the parties are directed to L.R. 73-2.2 Proof of Service. In any case in which only a magistrate judge is initially assigned, plaintiff must file a proof of service within 10 days of service of the summons and complaint as to each defendant. (dml)
July 6, 2023 Filing 3 NOTICE OF DEFICIENCIES in Attorney Case Opening RE: Notice of Removal (Attorney Civil Case Opening), #1 . The following error(s) was found: Other error(s) with document(s): Attachments s: 1 Civil Cover Sheet, 2 Notice of Interest Parties, 3 Demand for Jury Trial are attached to the Notice of Removal. Each of these documents should have been filed and entered separately under its correct event/relief. You need not take any action in response to this notice unless and until the Court directs you to do so. (ghap)
July 6, 2023 Filing 2 NOTICE TO COUNSEL re Magistrate Judge Direct Assignment Program. This case has been randomly assigned to Magistrate Judge Rozella A. Oliver. (Attachments: #1 CV-11C Statement of Consent to Proceed Before a United States Magistrate Judge) (ghap)
July 3, 2023 CONFORMED FILED COPY OF COMPLAINT against Defendants Does 1 through 50, inclusive, Target Corporation. Jury Demanded., filed by plaintiff David Mottahedeh. (FILED IN STATE COURT ON 5/22/2023 SUBMITTED ATTACHED EXHIBIT 1) (ghap)
July 3, 2023 CONFORMED COPY OF PROOF OF SERVICE Executed by Plaintiff David Mottahedeh, upon Defendant Target Corporation served on 6/5/2023, answer due 6/26/2023. Service of the Summons and Complaint were executed upon CT Corporation System-Diana Ruiz, Intake Specialist-Person Authorized to Accept Service of Process in compliance with California Code of Civil Procedure by personal service. (FILED IN STATE COURT ON 6/12/2023 SUBMITTED ATTACHED EXHIBIT 2) (ghap)
July 3, 2023 CONFORMED FILED COPY OF ANSWER to Complaint - (Discovery) filed by Defendant Target Corporation. (FILED IN STATE COURT ON 6/29/2023 SUBMITTED ATTACHED EXHIBIT 3)(ghap)
July 3, 2023 Filing 1 NOTICE OF REMOVAL from Los Angeles Superior Court, case number 23GDCV01061 Receipt No: ACACDC-35605741 - Fee: $402, filed by Defendant Target Corporation. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet, #2 Notice of Interest Parties, #3 Demand for Jury Trial) (Attorney David G Halm added to party Target Corporation(pty:3pd))(Halm, David)

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 this case: David Mottahedeh v. Target Corporation et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: David Mottahedeh
Represented By: Elissa Best
Represented By: Saman Ryan Heidari
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: Target Corporation
Represented By: David G Halm
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: Does 1 through 50, inclusive
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.


Why Is My Information Online?