Miguel Hernandez v. Jeffrey S. Williams et al
Miguel Hernandez |
Jeffrey S. Williams and Does 1 to 10 |
2:2023cv05496 |
July 10, 2023 |
US District Court for the Central District of California |
Steve Kim |
John A Kronstadt |
Civil Rights: Americans with Disabilities - Other |
42 U.S.C. ยง 12101 Americans With Disabilities Act |
Plaintiff |
Docket Report
This docket was last retrieved on October 12, 2023. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
Document Text |
---|
Filing 11 RESPONSE filed by Plaintiff Miguel Hernandezto Order to Show Cause,,,,, #10 re: Supplemental Jurisdiction (Attachments: #1 Declaration, #2 Declaration)(Kim, Jason) |
Filing 10 ORDER RE TO SHOW CAUSE RE:SUPPLEMENTAL JURISDICTION OVER STATE-LAW CLAIMS by Judge John A. Kronstadt. Response to Order to Show Cause due by 8/1/2023. In light of the foregoing, Plaintiff is ORDERED TO SHOW CAUSE why the Court should not decline to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over the state- law claims. Plaintiff shall file a response to this Order to Show Cause, not to exceed ten pages, on or before August 1, 2023. In responding to this Order to Show Cause, Plaintiff shall identify the amount of statutory damages Plaintiff seeks to recover. Plaintiff shall also present a declaration, signed under penalty of perjury, providing the evidence necessary for the Court to determine if Plaintiff meets the definition of a "high- frequency litigant" as defined in Cal. Code Civ. Proc. 425.50(b)(1) & (2). Failure to file a timely response to this Order to Show Cause may result in the dismissal of the state-law claims without prejudice by declining to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over them, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1367(c). Defendant may also file a response to this Order to Show Cause, not to exceed ten pages, on or before August 8, 2023. Upon receipt of the response(s), the matter will be taken under submission, and a written order will issue. (See document for further details) (yl) Modified on 7/25/2023 (yl). |
Filing 9 STANDING ORDERS FOR CIVIL CASES ASSIGNED TO JUDGE JOHN A. KRONSTADT upon filing of the complaint by Judge John A. Kronstadt. Please read each Order carefully as they differ in some respects from the Local Rules. Counsel are advised that the Court, at any time, may amend one or more of its Standing Orders. It is the responsibility of counsel to refer to this Courts Procedures and Schedules found on the website for the United States District Court, Central District of California (www.cacd.uscourts.gov) to obtain the operative order. The Court thanks the parties and their counsel for their anticipated cooperation in carrying out these requirements. (tj) |
Filing 8 21 DAY Summons Issued re Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening) #1 as to Defendant Jeffrey S. Williams. (et) |
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 John A. Kronstadt and Magistrate Judge Steve Kim. (et) |
Filing 4 Request for Clerk to Issue Summons on Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening) #1 filed by Plaintiff Miguel Hernandez. (Kim, Jason) |
Filing 3 CERTIFICATE of Interested Parties filed by Plaintiff Miguel Hernandez, (Kim, Jason) |
Filing 2 CIVIL COVER SHEET filed by Plaintiff Miguel Hernandez. (Kim, Jason) |
Filing 1 COMPLAINT Receipt No: ACACDC-35638238 - Fee: $402, filed by Plaintiff Miguel Hernandez. (Attorney Jason J Kim added to party Miguel Hernandez(pty:pla))(Kim, Jason) |
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.