Ava Naeini v. Cognizant Technology Solutions U.S. Corporation et al
| Ava Naeini |
| Cognizant Technology Solutions U.S. Corporation and Does 1-100, inclusive |
| 2:2023cv07118 |
| August 28, 2023 |
| US District Court for the Central District of California |
| Andre Birotte |
| Brianna Fuller Mircheff |
| Assault Libel & Slander |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1441 Notice of Removal |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on October 12, 2023. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 15 NOTICE OF DEFICIENCY Re: Notice of Default and Application for Entry of Default Judgment against Defendant Cognizant Technology Solutions U.S. Corporation #14 . The Clerk cannot enter the requested relief as: The name of the person served does not exactly match the person named in complaint. Case terminated on 10/12/2023. The case was stayed pending arbitration and administratively closed. Application for Entry of Default Judgment is premature as the party has not been placed into default. (gk) |
Filing 12
ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO COMPEL ARBITRATION AND STAY ACTION by Judge Andre Birotte Jr.: The Court GRANTS Defendant's Motion to Compel Arbitration #9 . Plaintiff Ava Naeini shall arbitrate her claims against Defendant Cognizant Technology Solutions U.S. Corporation. The Court hereby ORDERS that this action is STAYED pending arbitration. The parties are ORDERED to file Joint Status Reports every 120 days, and a Final Joint Status Report by 14 days after the arbitration concludes, along with any appropriate stipulation proposing how to proceed with this case, and a proposed Order. Each Joint Report must indicate on its face page the due date for the next one. Defendant is ORDERED take primary responsibility for filing the Joint Reports. In light of the stay, this action is removed from the Court's active caseload and ADMINISTRATIVELY CLOSED until further application by the parties or Court Order. The Court retains jurisdiction. Any pending calendar dates are VACATED. The Court's Order to Show Cause (Dkt. No. 10) is VACATED. (gk)
|
| Filing 14 NOTICE OF DEFAULT AND APPLICATION for Entry of Default Judgment filed by Plaintiff Ava Naeini. (gk) |
| Filing 13 RESPONSE to Show Cause #10 filed by Plaintiff Ava Naeini. (gk) |
| Filing 11 RESPONSE filed by Defendant Cognizant Technology Solutions U.S. Corporationto Minutes of In Chambers Order/Directive - no proceeding held,, Set/Reset Deadlines, #10 DEFENDANT COGNIZANT TECHNOLOGY SOLUTIONS U.S. CORPORATION'S RESPONSE TO ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE (ECF No. 10) (Shelton, Ian) |
|
Filing 10
MINUTES (IN CHAMBERS) Order To Show Cause Re: Dismissal for Lack of Prosecution by Judge Andre Birotte Jr.: The Court, on its own motion, orders Plaintiff(s) to show cause, in writing, on or before 10/18/2023, why this action should not be dismissed for lack of prosecution. This matter will stand submitted upon the filing of Plaintiff(s) response. Failure to respond will be deemed consent to the dismissal of the action. See document for further details. Court Reporter: N/A. (gk)
|
| Filing 9 NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION to Compel Arbitration filed by Defendant Cognizant Technology Solutions U.S. Corporation. Motion set for hearing on 10/13/2023 at 10:00 AM before Judge Andre Birotte Jr. (Attachments: #1 Memorandum in Support of Defendant's Motion to Compel Arbitration and to Stay Proceeding, #2 Declaration of Jessica Watts, #3 Exhibit A (Arbitration Agreement), #4 Proposed Order) (Shelton, Ian) |
|
Filing 8
STANDING ORDER upon filing of the complaint by Judge Andre Birotte Jr. (cb)
|
| Filing 7 NOTICE OF DEFICIENCIES in Attorney Case Opening. The following error(s) was found: Other error(s) with document(s): The pro se litigant's email address was added to CM/ECF in error upon the opening of this Notice of Removal case. The pro se litigant's email will be removed from CM/ECF and will not be used for electronic service without the appropriate registration and consent. See Local Rule 53. (sh) |
| Filing 6 Notice to Counsel Re Consent to Proceed Before a United States Magistrate Judge. (sh) |
| Filing 5 NOTICE TO PARTIES OF COURT-DIRECTED ADR PROGRAM filed. (sh) |
| Filing 4 NOTICE OF ASSIGNMENT to District Judge Andre Birotte Jr and Magistrate Judge Brianna Fuller Mircheff. (sh) |
| Filing 3 CIVIL COVER SHEET filed by Defendant Cognizant Technology Solutions U.S. Corporation. (Shelton, Ian) |
| Filing 2 NOTICE of Interested Parties filed by Defendant Cognizant Technology Solutions U.S. Corporation, identifying Cognizant Technology Solutions Corporation. (Shelton, Ian) |
| Filing 1 NOTICE OF REMOVAL from Los Angeles Superior Court, case number 23STCV17604 Receipt No: ACACDC-35942742 - Fee: $402, filed by Defendant Cognizant Technology Solutions U.S. Corporation. (Attachments: #1 Declaration of Jessica Watts, #2 Exhibit 1 (State Court Docket Sheet), #3 Exhibit 2 (State Court Civil Case Cover Sheet), #4 Exhibit 3 (State Court ADR Packet), #5 Exhibit 4 (State Court First Amended General Order re Mandatory Electronic Filing), #6 Exhibit 5 (State Court Voluntary Efficient Litigation Stipulation Packet), #7 Exhibit 6 (State Court Notice of Case Assignment), #8 Exhibit 7 (State Court Order on Fee Waiver), #9 Exhibit 8 (State Court Summons), #10 Exhibit 9 (State Court Proof of Service of Summons), #11 Exhibit 10 (State Court Notice of CMC)) (Attorney Ian Scott Shelton added to party Cognizant Technology Solutions U.S. Corporation(pty:dft))(Shelton, Ian) |
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.
