Priscilla Dinh v Victoria's Secret
Plaintiff: Priscilla Dinh
Defendant: DOES 1 to 20, inclusive and Victoria's Secret
Petitioner: Victoria's Secret Stores, LLC, erroneously sued and served as"Victoria's Secret"
Case Number: 5:2018cv01891
Filed: September 5, 2018
Court: US District Court for the Central District of California
Presiding Judge: Jesus G Bernal
Referring Judge: Kenly Kiya Kato
Nature of Suit: P.I.: Other
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 1441
Jury Demanded By: None
Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on October 4, 2019. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
September 14, 2018 Filing 7 NOTICE filed by Defendant Victoria's Secret. of State Filed Answer (Tropio, Scott)
September 11, 2018 Opinion or Order Filing 6 STANDING ORDER upon filing of the complaint by Judge Jesus G. Bernal. (ima)
September 7, 2018 Filing 5 NOTICE TO PARTIES OF COURT-DIRECTED ADR PROGRAM filed. (jtil)
September 7, 2018 Filing 4 NOTICE OF ASSIGNMENT to District Judge Jesus G. Bernal and Magistrate Judge Kenly Kiya Kato. (jtil)
September 5, 2018 CONFORMED COPY OF COMPLAINT filed by Plaintiff Priscilla Dinh in San Bernardino Superior Court on 6/12/2018, attached as Exhibit A. (jtil)
September 5, 2018 Filing 3 NOTICE of Interested Parties filed by defendant Victoria's Secret Stores, LLC, erroneously sued and served as"Victoria's Secret", identifying Victoria's Secret Stores, LLC and L Brands, Inc.. (Tropio, Scott)
September 5, 2018 Filing 2 CIVIL COVER SHEET filed by Movant Victoria's Secret Stores, LLC, erroneously sued and served as"Victoria's Secret". (Tropio, Scott)
September 5, 2018 Filing 1 NOTICE OF REMOVAL from San Bernardino County Superior Court, case number CIVDS1814580 Receipt No: 0973-22372900 - Fee: $400, filed by defendant Victoria's Secret Stores, LLC, erroneously sued and served as"Victoria's Secret". (Attachments: #1 Declaration) (Attorney Scott T Tropio added to party Victoria's Secret Stores, LLC, erroneously sued and served as"Victoria's Secret"(pty:bkmov))(Tropio, Scott)

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 this case: Priscilla Dinh v Victoria's Secret
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Petitioner: Victoria's Secret Stores, LLC, erroneously sued and served as"Victoria's Secret"
Represented By: Scott T Tropio
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 ]
Plaintiff: Priscilla Dinh
Represented By: Victoria Hang Thuy Le
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: DOES 1 to 20, inclusive
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: Victoria's Secret
Represented By: Scott T Tropio
Represented By: Hannah Cheeyon Lee
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.


Why Is My Information Online?