Marquise Bailey v. LBC Americana LLC et al
| Marquise Bailey |
| LBC Americana LLC, Thien Phan and Does 1 to 10 |
| 2:2023cv08265 |
| October 2, 2023 |
| US District Court for the Central District of California |
| Jacqueline Chooljian |
| Otis D Wright |
| Civil Rights: Americans with Disabilities - Other |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 12101 Americans With Disabilities Act |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on October 25, 2023. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 12
MINUTE ORDER IN CHAMBERS by Judge Otis D. Wright, II: The Court has reviewed the Response filed by Plaintiff and Plaintiff s counsel to the Court's Order to Show Cause #11 . The Court, in its discretion, declines to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over Plaintiff's Unruh Act and any other construction-related accessibility claim. The Court therefore dismisses any such claims without prejudice. (lc)
|
| Filing 11 RESPONSE filed by Plaintiff Marquise Baileyto Minutes of In Chambers Order/Directive - no proceeding held,, #9 re: Supplemental Jurisdiction (Attachments: #1 Declaration, #2 Declaration)(Kim, Jason) |
|
Filing 10
MINUTE ORDER IN CHAMBERS by Judge Otis D. Wright, II: ORDER REGARDING PROSECUTION OF CERTAIN CASES UNDER THE AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT. The Court finds that there is good cause to institute a limited scheduling order concerning basic case prosecution for cases under the Americans With Disabilities Act involving access barriers in places of public accommodation. (SEE DOCUMENT FOR SPECIFIC ENUMERATED REQUIREMENTS AND DEADLINES THEREIN). The failure to comply with this Order in a particular case will result in a sanction of $300.00 payable to the clerk of the court within two weeks of Plaintiff being given notice of noncompliance and dismissal for lack of prosecution. The Court finds these sanctions sufficient and necessary to deter violations of the Order and to achieve timely prosecution of these cases without unnecessary intervention by the Court. (lc)
|
|
Filing 9
MINUTE ORDER IN CHAMBERS by Judge Otis D. Wright, II:The Court therefore ORDERS Plaintiff to SHOW CAUSE IN WRITING NO LATER THAN TWO WEEKS FROM THE DATE OF THIS ORDER why the Court should exercise supplemental jurisdiction over the Unruh Act claim and any other state law claim asserted in the Complaint. Failure to timely or adequately respond to this Order to Show Cause may, without further warning, result in the dismissal of the entire action without prejudice or the Court declining to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over the Unruh Act and other state law claims, if any, and the dismissal of that claim pursuant to 28 USC 1367 (c). (lc)
|
| Filing 8 21 DAY Summons Issued re Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening) #1 as to Defendants LBC Americana LLC, Thien Phan. (car) |
| Filing 7 Notice to Counsel Re Consent to Proceed Before a United States Magistrate Judge. (car) |
| Filing 6 NOTICE TO PARTIES OF COURT-DIRECTED ADR PROGRAM filed. (car) |
| Filing 5 NOTICE OF ASSIGNMENT to District Judge Otis D. Wright, II and Magistrate Judge Jacqueline Chooljian. (car) |
| Filing 4 Request for Clerk to Issue Summons on Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening) #1 Marquise Bailey. (Kim, Jason) |
| Filing 3 CERTIFICATE of Interested Parties (Kim, Jason) |
| Filing 2 CIVIL COVER SHEET filed by Plaintiff Marquise Bailey. (Kim, Jason) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT Receipt No: ACACDC-36146423 - Fee: $402. (Attorney Jason J Kim added to party Marquise Bailey(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.
