Xiomara Vega v. Target Corporation
| Xiomara Vega |
| Does and Target Corporation |
| 5:2016cv02157 |
| October 12, 2016 |
| US District Court for the Central District of California |
| Beverly Reid O'Connell |
| Sheri Pym |
| P.I.: Other |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
16
MINUTES (IN CHAMBERS) ORDER Re Failure to Oppose Plaintiff Motion for Leave to file Amended and to Remand Action to State court 14 by Judge Beverly Reid O'Connell: The Court GRANTS Plaintiff Motion for Leave to Amend pursuant to Rule 7-12 and GRANTS Plaintiffs Motion to Remand. The hearing currently scheduled for Monday, December 12, 2016, is hereby VACATED. (MD JS-6. Case Terminated.) (jp)
|
|
Filing
15
ORDER RE FAILURE TO OPPOSE PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE AMENDED COMPLAINT AND TO REMAND ACTION TO STATE COURT 14 by Judge Beverly Reid O'Connell. Defendant is ORDERED TO SHOW CAUSE as to why it failed to timely oppose Plaintiff� 39;s Motion. Both (1) Defendant's Response to this Order and (2) Defendant's Opposition, if any, to the Motion shall be filed by no later than Thursday, December 1, 2016, at 4:00 p.m. Plaintiff's Reply, if any, is due no later than Tuesday, December 6, 2016, at 4:00 p.m. Defendants failure to respond to this Order or to file an Opposition by the given deadline may result in the granting of Plaintiffs Motion. (rfi)
|
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.
