Marilyn Hayden et al v. American Honda Motor Co., Inc.
| Marilyn Hayden and Ross Hayden |
| American Honda Motor Co., Inc. and Does 1 through 10, inclusive |
| 2:2023cv10891 |
| December 29, 2023 |
| US District Court for the Central District of California |
| Consuelo B Marshall |
| Rozella A Oliver |
| Alka Sagar |
| Contract: Other |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1441 Notice of Removal -- Other Contract |
| Both |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on February 5, 2024. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 12 ANSWER to Complaint - (Discovery), Answer filed by Defendant American Honda Motor Co., Inc. American Honda Motor Co., Inc..(Tahsildoost, Soheyl) |
Filing 11
STANDING ORDER upon filing of the complaint by Judge Consuelo B. Marshall. READ THIS ORDER CAREFULLY. It controls this case and may differ in some respects from the Local Rules. See order for more information. (ys)
|
| Filing 10 NOTICE OF REASSIGNMENT of MJDAP case from Magistrate Judge Rozella A. Oliver to Judge Consuelo B. Marshall for all further proceedings. Any discovery matters that may be referred to a Magistrate Judge are assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Alka Sagar. The case number will now reflect the initials of the transferee Judges 2:23-cv-10891 CBM(ASx). (rn) |
| Filing 9 DECLINED STATEMENT OF CONSENT TO PROCEED before the assigned Magistrate Judge (Attorney Elizabeth A LaRocque added to party Marilyn Hayden(pty:pla))(LaRocque, Elizabeth) |
| Filing 8 REMINDER NOTICE re Magistrate Judge Direct Assignment Program. Each party must file form CV-11C within the consent deadlines pursuant to L.R. 73-2. Additionally, the parties are directed to L.R. 73-2.2 Proof of Service. In any case in which only a magistrate judge is initially assigned, plaintiff must file a proof of service within 10 days of service of the summons and complaint as to each defendant. (eq) |
| Filing 7 NOTICE TO COUNSEL re Magistrate Judge Direct Assignment Program. This case has been randomly assigned to Magistrate Judge Rozella A. Oliver. (Attachments: #1 CV11C Statement of Consent) (et) |
| CONFORMED E-FILED COPY OF COMPLAINT against Defendants American Honda Motor Co., Inc., Does 1 through 10 inclusive. Jury Demanded., filed by Plaintiffs Ross Hayden, Marilyn Hayden. [FILED IN STATE COURT ON 11/21/2023 SUBMITTED ATTACHED TO NOTICE OF REMOVAL #1 ]. (et) |
| Filing 6 CORPORATE DISCLOSURE STATEMENT filed by Defendant American Honda Motor Co., Inc. identifying Honda Motor Company, Ltd as Corporate Parent. (Tahsildoost, Soheyl) |
| Filing 5 NOTICE of Interested Parties filed by Defendant American Honda Motor Co., Inc., identifying Honda Motor Company, Ltd. (Tahsildoost, Soheyl) |
| Filing 4 CORPORATE DISCLOSURE STATEMENT filed by Defendant American Honda Motor Co., Inc. identifying Honda Motor Company, Ltd as Corporate Parent. (Tahsildoost, Soheyl) |
| Filing 3 CIVIL COVER SHEET filed by Defendant American Honda Motor Co., Inc.. (Tahsildoost, Soheyl) |
| Filing 2 EXHIBIT Filed filed by Defendant American Honda Motor Co., Inc.. as to Notice of Removal (Attorney Civil Case Opening), #1 . (Attachments: #1 Exhibit Exhibit A-Complaint, #2 Exhibit Exhibit B- KBB)(Tahsildoost, Soheyl) |
| Filing 1 NOTICE OF REMOVAL from Los Angeles, case number 23NWCV03769 Receipt No: ACACDC-36648594 - Fee: $405, filed by Defendant American Honda Motor Co., Inc. American Honda Motor Co., Inc.. (Attorney Soheyl Tahsildoost added to party American Honda Motor Co., Inc.(pty:dft))(Tahsildoost, Soheyl) |
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.
