Karine Kaplan v. Koninklijke Luchtvaart Maatschappij, N.V.
Karine Kaplan |
KONINKLIJKE LUCHTVAART MAATSCHAPPIJ, N.V.,, Koninklijke Luchtvaart Maatschappij, N.V. and DOES 1 through 20, inclusive |
2:2024cv01582 |
February 27, 2024 |
U.S. District Court for the Central District of California |
Dale S Fischer |
Steve Kim |
Airplane |
28 U.S.C. ยง 1391 Personal Injury |
Plaintiff |
Docket Report
This docket was last retrieved on February 29, 2024. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
Document Text |
---|
Filing 9 21 DAY Summons Issued re Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening) #1 as to Defendant Koninklijke Luchtvaart Maatschappij, N.V. (jtil) |
![]() |
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 Dale S. Fischer and Magistrate Judge Steve Kim. (jtil) |
Filing 4 Request for Clerk to Issue Summons on Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening) #1 filed by Plaintiff Karine Kaplan. (Roston, Matthew) |
Filing 3 NOTICE of Interested Parties filed by Plaintiff Karine Kaplan, (Roston, Matthew) |
Filing 2 CIVIL COVER SHEET filed by Plaintiff Karine Kaplan. (Roston, Matthew) |
Filing 1 COMPLAINT Receipt No: ACACDC-36984943 - Fee: $405, filed by Plaintiff Karine Kaplan. (Attorney Matthew Ellsworth Roston added to party Karine Kaplan(pty:pla))(Roston, Matthew) |
Access additional case information on PACER
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the U.S. 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.