Junious Nielsen v. Regal Cinemas Inc.
| Junious Nielsen |
| Regal Cinemas Inc. |
| 2:2024cv01072 |
| February 7, 2024 |
| US District Court for the Central District of California |
| Mark C Scarsi |
| Karen E Scott |
| Civil Rights: Jobs |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1331 Fed. Question |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on March 20, 2024. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 12 MINUTES (IN CHAMBERS) by Judge Mark C. Scarsi: ORDER RE: MOTION TO DISMISS #11 . Plaintiff Junious Nielsen brings this case against Defendant Regal Cinemas Inc. under the Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act of 1994. (Compl., ECF No. 1.) The Court dismissed the complaint with leave to amend. (Order, ECF No. 8.) Instead of amending, Plaintiff now moves to dismiss the case because he wants to pursue it in New York instead of in California. (Mot., ECF No. 11.) A plaintiff may dismiss a case without a court order by filing "a notice of dismissal before the opposing party serves either an answer or a motion for summary judgment." Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(l)(A)(i). The Court treats Plaintiff's motion to dismiss as a notice of dismissal under this rule. Because Plaintiff does not need permission to dismiss, the Court Denies the motion as unnecessary and Deems this case dismissed without prejudice to Plaintiff pursuing his claims in a court in New York with jurisdiction. The Court directs the Clerk to close the electronic case file. (Made JS-6. Case Terminated.) (lc) |
| Filing 11 (DEEMED AS PLAINTIFF'S NOTICE OF DISMISSAL PER 3/20/2024 MINUTE ORDER DOCKET NO. 12).NOTICE OF MOTION TO DISMISS, REQUEST TO THE COURT TO DISMISS MY CASE SO I CAN FILE IN THE PROPER JURISDICTION AND ALSO TO PERSUE CASE IN THE STATE OF NEW YORK INSTEAD OF CALIFORNIA; DECLARATION filed by plaintiff Junious Nielsen. (lc) Modified on 3/20/2024 (lc). |
| Filing 10 TEXT ONLY (IN CHAMBERS) NOTICE TO PRO SE LITIGANTS by Judge Mark C. Scarsi: Although Plaintiff is proceeding pro se, i.e., without legal representation, she/he nonetheless is required to comply with Court orders, the Local Rules, and the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. See C.D. Cal. L.R. 83-2.2.3. The Local Rules are available on the Court's website, http://www.cacd.uscourts.gov/court-procedures/ local-rules. The Court cannot provide legal advice to any party, including pro se litigants, i.e., parties who are not represented by a lawyer. There is a free "Pro Se Clinic" that can provide information and guidance about many aspects of civil litigation in this Court. The Court notes that a party to this lawsuit does not have a lawyer. Parties in court without a lawyer are called "pro se litigants." These parties often face special challenges in federal court. Public Counsel runs a free Federal Pro Se Clinic where pro se litigants can get information and guidance. The Clinic is located at the Roybal Federal Building and Courthouse, 255 East Temple Street, Los Angeles, CA 90012 (note that the clinic may not be open for in-person appointments during the pandemic). Pro se litigants must call or submit an on-line application to request services as follows: on-line applications can be submitted at http://prose.cacd.uscourts.gov/los-angeles, or call (213) 385-2977, ext. 270. Pro se litigants may submit documents for filing through the Court's Electronic Document Submission System (EDSS) instead of mailing or bringing documents to the Clerk's Office. Only internet access and an e-mail address are required. Documents are submitted in PDF format through an online portal on the Court's website. To access EDSS and for additional information, visit the Court's website at https://apps.cacd.uscourts.gov/edss. Attorneys may not use EDSS to submit documents on behalf of their clients. Attorneys are required by the local rules to file documents electronically using the Court's CM/ECF System. THERE IS NO PDF DOCUMENT ASSOCIATED WITH THIS ENTRY. (smo) |
Filing 9
INITIAL STANDING ORDER FOR CIVIL CASES ASSIGNED TO JUDGE MARK C. SCARSI upon filing of the complaint by Judge Mark C. Scarsi. (smo)
|
|
Filing 8
ORDER ON REQUEST TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS (NON-PRISONER CASE) by Judge Mark C. Scarsi: On the question of indigency, the Court finds that the party who filed the Request has not submitted enough information for the Court to tell if the filer is able to pay the filing fees. This is what is missing: Plaintiff did not answer Question l(b) regarding income from past employment: As explained in the attached statement, the Request is DENIED because The action fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted #3 . IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that:ISi Within 30 days of the date of this Order, the filer must do the following:Plaintiff must file a signed amended complaint and request to proceed in forma pauperis. If the filer does not comply with these instructions within 30 days, this case will be DISMISSED without prejudice. (lc)
|
| Filing 7 Notice to Counsel Re Consent to Proceed Before a United States Magistrate Judge. (jtil) |
| Filing 6 NOTICE TO PARTIES OF COURT-DIRECTED ADR PROGRAM filed. (jtil) |
| Filing 5 NOTICE OF ASSIGNMENT to District Judge Mark C. Scarsi and Magistrate Judge Karen E. Scott. (jtil) |
| Filing 4 NOTICE TO FILER OF DEFICIENCIES in Filed Document RE: Complaint - (Discovery), #1 . The following error(s) was/were found: Document lacks required signature. In response to this notice, the Court may: (1) order an amended or correct document to be filed; (2) order the document stricken; or (3) take other action as the Court deems appropriate. You need not take any action in response to this notice unless and until the Court directs you to do so. (jtil) |
| Filing 3 REQUEST to Proceed In Forma Pauperis, Declaration in Support filed by Plaintiff Junious Nielsen. (jtil) |
| Filing 2 CERTIFICATE of Interested Parties filed by Plaintiff Junious Nielsen. (jtil) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT filed by Plaintiff Junious Nielsen against Defendant Regal Cinemas Inc. Case assigned to Judge Mark C. Scarsi for all further proceedings. Discovery referred to Magistrate Judge Karen E. Scott. (Attachments: #1 CV71, #2 Summons Request) (jtil) |
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
| Search for this case: Junious Nielsen v. Regal Cinemas Inc. | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Plaintiff: Junious Nielsen | |
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Finance | [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Defendant: Regal Cinemas Inc. | |
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Finance | [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
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.
