Andrew Rodriguez v. S E Pipeline Construction Co et al
| Andrew Rodriguez |
| S E Pipeline Construction Co and Does 1 through 20, inclusive |
| 2:2023cv08769 |
| October 18, 2023 |
| US District Court for the Central District of California |
| Wesley L Hsu |
| Michael R Wilner |
| Labor: Labor/Mgt. Relations |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1441 Notice of Removal - Labor/Mgmnt. Relations |
| Both |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on October 18, 2023. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 5 PROOF OF SERVICE filed by Defendant S E Pipeline Construction Co, Proof of Service of Notice to State Court served on 10/18/2023. (Becker, Erick) |
| Filing 4 PROOF OF SERVICE filed by Defendant S E Pipeline Construction Co, re Notice of Removal (Attorney Civil Case Opening), #1 , Certificate/Notice of Interested Parties #3 , Civil Cover Sheet (CV-71) #2 served on 10/18/2023. (Becker, Erick) |
| Filing 3 NOTICE of Interested Parties filed by Defendant S E Pipeline Construction Co, (Becker, Erick) |
| Filing 2 CIVIL COVER SHEET filed by Movant S E Pipeline Construction Co. (Becker, Erick) |
| Filing 1 NOTICE OF REMOVAL from Los Angeles Superior Court, case number 23STCV17803 Receipt No: ACACDC-36244226 - Fee: $402, filed by Defendant S E Pipeline Construction Co. (Attachments: #1 Declaration Declaration of Shannon Hearn) (Attorney Erick J Becker added to party S E Pipeline Construction Co(pty:bkmov))(Becker, Erick) |
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.
