Raji Kitchen v.Bruno Stok
Raji Kitchen |
Bruno Stok |
5:2012cv01244 |
July 26, 2012 |
US District Court for the Central District of California |
John E. McDermott |
Virginia A. Phillips |
Habeas Corpus (General) |
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
Document Text |
---|
Filing 21 JUDGMENT by Judge Virginia A. Phillips, IT IS HEREBY ADJUDGED that this action is dismissed with prejudice. Related to: Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (2254) 1 , R&R - Accepting Report and Recommendations, 20 (MD JS-6, Case Terminated). (lmh) |
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: Raji Kitchen v.Bruno Stok | |
---|---|
Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
Petitioner: Raji Kitchen | |
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 ] |
Respondent: Bruno Stok | |
Represented By: | Arlene Aquintey Sevidal |
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.