Samantha Robert Eisele et al v. UC San Diego et al
| Samantha Robert Eisele and Parker Stanbury LLP |
| UC San Diego and Alpha Epsilon Phi |
| 2:2023cv06168 |
| July 31, 2023 |
| US District Court for the Central District of California |
| Dolly M Gee |
| Alka Sagar |
| Civil Rights: Other |
| 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on September 21, 2023. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 25
MINUTES (IN CHAMBERS) ORDER DENYING IN FORMA PAUPERIS APPLICATION AND GRANTING REQUEST TO AMEND COMPLAINT by Judge Dolly M. Gee: The Court grants the request to amend the complaint #14 and considers the second amended complaint filed 8/24/2023 as the operative complaint in this action. Plaintiff's income is well over the U.S. federal poverty guidelines threshold for a one-person household. Accordingly, her request to proceed in Forma Pauperis ("IFP") #3 is DENIED. Eisele shall pay the $402 filing fee for this action by 10/13/2023. Eisele may alternatively file a renewed IFP application, if she has substantial expenses or other financial information that she did not include in her original IFP application and that she believes makes her unable to afford the filing fee. Failure to file a renewed IFP application or to pay the filing fee by 10/13/2023 will result in dismissal of this action without prejudice. Court Reporter: Not Reported. (gk)
|
| Filing 24 NOTICE OF DEFICIENCY Re: REQUEST for Default Judgment against Defendant AEPhi #21 . The Clerk cannot enter the requested relief as: No Entry of Default on file. No declaration as required by F.R.Civ.P 55(b). The name of the person for which Default Judgment is requested does not exactly match the person named in the complaint. A declaration establishing the amount due must accompany the plaintiffs request for default judgment. (bm) |
| Filing 23 NOTICE OF DEFICIENCY Re: APPLICATION for Clerk to Enter Default against defendants Alpha Epsilon Phi, UC San Diego #20 . The Clerk cannot enter the requested relief as: No declaration as required by F.R.Civ.P 55(a), The name of the person for which Default is requested does not exactly match the persons named in the complaint. The proof of service returned does not indicate proof of who is the name of the authorized agent accepting service upon the business. (bm) |
| Filing 19 NOTICE OF DEFICIENCY Re: REQUEST for Default Judgment against Defendants #18 . The Clerk cannot enter the requested relief as: No Entry of Default on file. No declaration as required by F.R.Civ.P 55(b). The name of the person for which Default Judgment is requested does not exactly match the person named in the complaint. A declaration establishing the amount due must accompany the plaintiff's request for default judgment. (bm) |
| Filing 22 PROOF OF SERVICE Executed by Plaintiff Samantha Robert Eisele, upon Defendant UC San Diego served on 7/31/2023, answer due 8/21/2023. Service of the Summons and Complaint were executed upon UC Office of the President in compliance with statute not specified by substituted service by mail and by also mailing a copy (bm) |
| Filing 21 REQUEST for Default Judgment against Defendant AEPhi filed by plaintiff Samantha Robert Eisele. (bm) |
| Filing 20 APPLICATION for Clerk to Enter Default against defendants Alpha Epsilon Phi, UC San Diego filed by plaintiff Samantha Robert Eisele. (bm) |
| Filing 18 REQUEST for Default Judgment against Defendant UC San Diego filed by Plaintiff Samantha Robert Eisele. (et) |
| Filing 17 NOTICE OF DEFICIENCY Re: REQUEST for Default Judgment Against Defendants #15 . The Clerk cannot enter the requested relief as: No Entry of Default on file. No declaration as required by F.R.Civ.P 55(b). The name of the person for which Default Judgment is requested does not exactly match the person named in the complaint. A declaration establishing the amount due must accompany the plaintiff's request for default judgment. (hr) |
| Filing 16 PROOF OF SERVICE filed by Plaintiff Samantha Robert Eisele, re Two Amended Complaints #12 served on 8/28/23. (hr) |
| Filing 15 REQUEST for Default Judgment Against Defendants filed by Plaintiff Samantha Robert Eisele. (hr) |
| Filing 14 REQUEST Amended Complaint filed by Plaintiff Samantha Robert Eisele. (hr) |
|
Filing 13
MINUTES (IN CHAMBERS) ORDER DENYING REQUEST FOR HEARING DATE by Judge Dolly M. Gee: Plaintiff Samantha Eisele, proceeding pro se, filed a request for a hearing on 8/25/2023 #11 . Her request does not specify the pending motion for which she seeks a hearing or what matter she wishes to address with the Court. The pending matters in this case are (1) a request to proceed in forma pauperis ("IFP"), which the Court has deferred ruling on unless and until Eisele complies with the Court's screening order (Doc. No. 10) and (2) an application for Eisele to file electronically. There is no need for a hearing on either matter. The request for hearing date is DENIED. Court Reporter: Not Reported. (gk)
|
| Filing 11 REQUEST for Hearing Date of Friday, August 25, 2023 filed by Plaintiff Samantha Robert Eisele. (hr) |
| Filing 12 AMENDED COMPLAINT against Defendants Alpha Epsilon Phi, UC San Diego, amending Complaint #1 , filed by Plaintiff Samantha Robert Eisele(hr) |
|
Filing 10
MINUTES [IN CHAMBERS] ORDER DISMISSING COMPLAINT WITH LEAVE TO AMEND, DEFERRING RULING ON IN FORMA PAUPERIS APPLICATION #3 , AND DENYING PENDING REQUESTS #5 , #6 ,[ 7] by Judge Dolly M. Gee. The Court dismisses the complaint with leave to amend and denies the pending requests [Doc. # 5, 6, 7]. Eisele may file an amended complaint by no later than September 11, 2023, if she wishes to proceed with this action. If she wishes, she may use the Court's form for her amended complaint.3 It must not incorporate any part of the prior complaint by reference. The amended complaint must include a short, plain statement of each claim that she intends to bring, including specific, plausible allegations of the facts on which her claims rely. Failure to timely file an amended complaint, to comply with this Order, or to remedy the deficiencies identified herein will result in the dismissal of this matter without prejudice for failure to prosecute, to state a claim, and/or to comply with a Court Order. The Court declines to rule on Eisele's IFP application unless and until she complies with this Order. (lom)
|
| Filing 9 APPLICATION for Pro Se Litigant to electronically file documents in a specific case filed by Plaintiff Samantha Robert Eisele. (hr) |
| Filing 8 PROOF OF SERVICE filed by Plaintiff Samantha Robert Eisele re Summons, Cover Sheet served on 7/31/23. (hr) |
| Filing 7 REQUEST/PLEA filed by Plaintiff Samantha Robert Eisele. (hr) |
| Filing 6 REQUEST filed by Plaintiff Samantha Robert Eisele. (et) |
| Filing 5 REQUEST filed by Plaintiff Samantha Robert Eisele. (hr) |
| Filing 4 NOTICE OF ASSIGNMENT to District Judge Dolly M. Gee and referred to Magistrate Judge Alka Sagar. (sh) |
| Filing 3 REQUEST to Proceed In Forma Pauperis, Declaration in Support filed by Plaintiff Samantha Robert Eisele. (sh) |
| Filing 2 Certification and Notice of Interested Parties filed by Plaintiff Samantha Robert Eisele, (sh) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT filed against Defendants Alpha Epsilon Phi, UC San Diego Case assigned to Judge Dolly M. Gee and referred to Magistrate Judge Alka Sagar., filed by Plaintiff Samantha Robert Eisele. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet) (sh) |
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.
