Jose Martinez v. Skechers USA Retail, LLC et al
| Does 1 to 10 |
| Skechers USA Retail, LLC and Jose Martinez |
| 2:2024cv00019 |
| January 2, 2024 |
| US District Court for the Central District of California |
| Jean P Rosenbluth |
| Otis D Wright |
| Civil Rights: Americans with Disabilities - Other |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1441 Notice of Removal - Civil Rights Act |
| Defendant |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on February 13, 2024. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 12
MINUTE ORDER IN CHAMBERS by Judge Otis D. Wright, II: On January 16, 2024, the Court ordered Plaintiff to show cause why the Court should exercise supplemental jurisdiction over Plaintiffs Unruh Act claim and any other state law claim asserted in the Complaint #10 . The deadline for Plaintiffs response was January 30, 2024. In its Order, the Court warned that "[f]ailure 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." As of today'sdate, two weeks after Plaintiffs deadline and almost a month after the Court's Order, the Court has not received any response from the Plaintiff. Accordingly, the Court hereby DISMISSES this action WITHOUT PREJUDICE. The Clerk of the Court shall close this case. (Made JS-6. Case Terminated.) (lc)
|
|
Filing 11
MINUTE ORDER IN CHAMBERS by Judge Otis D Wright, II: This action has been assigned to the calendar of Judge Otis D. Wright II. EFFECTIVE IMMEDIATELY- No mandatory chambers copies required, EXCEPT FOR Motions for summary judgment and any other evidence-heavy motions. The Court's Electronic Document Submission System (EDSS) allows people without lawyers who have pending cases in the United States District Court for the Central District of California to submitdocuments electronically to the Clerks Office The parties may consent to proceed before a Magistrate Judge appearing on the voluntary consent list. PLEASE refer to Local Rule 79-5 for the submission of CIVIL ONLY SEALED DOCUMENTS. CRIMINAL SEALED DOCUMENTS will remain the same. Please refer to Court's Website and Judge's procedures for information as applicable. (lc)
|
|
Filing 10
MINUTE ORDER IN CHAMBERS by Judge Otis D. Wright, II: The Court ORDERS Plaintiff to SHOW CAUSE in writing No Later than Two weeks from 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 to28 U.S.C. 1367(c). (lc)
|
| Filing 9 NOTICE OF REASSIGNMENT of MJDAP case from Magistrate Judge Steve Kim to Judge Otis D. Wright, II for all further proceedings. Any discovery matters that may be referred to a Magistrate Judge are assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Jean P. Rosenbluth. The case number will now reflect the initials of the transferee Judges 2:24-cv-00019 ODW(JPRx). (rn) |
| Filing 8 DECLINED STATEMENT OF CONSENT TO PROCEED before the assigned Magistrate Judge (Attachments: #1 Certificate of Service)(Grunvald, Hayley) |
| Filing 7 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. (hr) |
|
Filing 6
(IN CHAMBERS) STANDING ORDER by Magistrate Judge Steve Kim: This action has been assigned to the civil consent calendar of Judge Steve Kim through the Voluntary Consent Program or the Magistrate Judges Direct Assignment Program. (SEE ORDER FOR DETAILS). (et)
|
| Filing 5 Notice to Parties: ADA Disability Access Litigation. (clee) |
| Filing 4 NOTICE TO COUNSEL re Magistrate Judge Direct Assignment Program. This case has been randomly assigned to Magistrate Judge Steve Kim. (Attachments: #1 CV-11C) (lh) |
| CONFORMED FILED COPY OF COMPLAINT against Defendants Does, Skechers USA Retail, LLC, filed by Plaintiff Jose Martinez. (FILED IN LOS ANGELES COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT ON 9/15/2023 SUBMITTED ATTACHED TO NOTICE OF REMOVAL #1 ) (lh) |
| CONFORMED FILED COPY OF ANSWER to Complaint, filed by Defendant Skechers USA Retail, LLC. (FILED IN LOS ANGELES COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT ON 1/2/2024 SUBMITTED ATTACHED TO NOTICE OF REMOVAL #1 )(lh) |
| Filing 3 NOTICE of Interested Parties filed by Defendant Skechers USA Retail, LLC, identifying Skechers USA Retail, LLC, Skechers USA, Inc. and Jose Martinez. (Attachments: #1 Certificate of Service)(Grunvald, Hayley) |
| Filing 2 CIVIL COVER SHEET filed by Movant Skechers USA Retail, LLC. (Attachments: #1 Certificate of Service)(Grunvald, Hayley) |
| Filing 1 NOTICE OF REMOVAL from Los Angeles Superior Court, case number 23CMCV01490 Receipt No: ACACDC-36653840 - Fee: $405, filed by Defendant Skechers USA Retail, LLC. (Attachments: #1 Index of Exhibits, #2 Exhibit A - Complaint, #3 Exhibit B - Notice of Acknowledgement of Receipt, #4 Exhibit C - Answer, #5 Exhibit D - All other state court documents, #6 Certificate of Service) (Attorney Hayley Singer Grunvald added to party Skechers USA Retail, LLC(pty:bkmov))(Grunvald, Hayley) |
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.
