Hoang Minh Le v. Larry Fugate
Plaintiff: Hoang Minh Le
Defendant: Larry Fugate and Larry Fugate an individual doing business as Pizza Hut
Case Number: 5:2018cv02245
Filed: October 22, 2018
Court: US District Court for the Central District of California
Presiding Judge: Dale S Fischer
Referring Judge: Sheri Pym
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights: Americans with Disabilities - Other
Cause of Action: 42 U.S.C. ยง 12101
Jury Demanded By: Plaintiff
Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on December 4, 2018. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
December 4, 2018 Filing 9 Joint STIPULATION Extending Time to Answer the complaint as to Larry Fugate answer now due 12/31/2018, filed by Defendant Larry Fugate.(Attorney Martin H Orlick added to party Larry Fugate(pty:dft))(Orlick, Martin)
October 23, 2018 Opinion or Order Filing 8 STANDING ORDER FOR CASES ASSIGNED TO JUDGE DALE S. FISCHER upon filing of the complaint by Judge Dale S. Fischer. If a party would be entitled to attorneys fees, counsel are referred to the Order Re Fees found on Court's website under Judge Fischer's Procedures and Schedules contained in the Judge's Requirements tab. Read all Orders carefully. They govern this case and differ in some respects from the Local Rules. COUNSEL ARE ORDERED TO PROVIDE A MANDATORY CHAMBERS COPY OF THE COMPLAINT, NOTICE OF REMOVAL, AND ANY OTHER INITIATING DOCUMENTS. (rfi)
October 22, 2018 Filing 7 21 DAY Summons Issued re Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening) #1 as to Defendant Larry Fugate. (et)
October 22, 2018 Filing 6 NOTICE TO PARTIES OF COURT-DIRECTED ADR PROGRAM filed. (et)
October 22, 2018 Filing 5 NOTICE OF ASSIGNMENT to District Judge Dale S. Fischer and Magistrate Judge Sheri Pym. (et)
October 22, 2018 Filing 4 Request for Clerk to Issue Summons on Certificate/Notice of Interested Parties #3 , Civil Cover Sheet (CV-71) #2 , Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening) #1 filed by Plaintiff Hoang Minh Le. (Tsao, Pamela)
October 22, 2018 Filing 3 CERTIFICATE of Interested Parties filed by Plaintiff Hoang Minh Le, (Tsao, Pamela)
October 22, 2018 Filing 2 CIVIL COVER SHEET filed by Plaintiff Hoang Minh Le. (Tsao, Pamela)
October 22, 2018 Filing 1 COMPLAINT Receipt No: 0973-22617246 - Fee: $400, filed by Plaintiff Hoang Minh Le. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A) (Attorney Pamela Tsao added to party Hoang Minh Le(pty:pla))(Tsao, Pamela)

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: Hoang Minh Le v. Larry Fugate
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Larry Fugate
Represented By: Kate Sagers
Represented By: Martin H Orlick
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: Larry Fugate an individual doing business as Pizza Hut
Represented By: Kate Sagers
Represented By: Martin H Orlick
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: Hoang Minh Le
Represented By: Pamela Tsao
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?