Jose T. Barajas et al v. Mercedes-Benz USA, LLC et al
| Jose T Barajas, Karen Guerrero and Jose T. Barajas |
| Mercedes-Benz USA, LLC and Does 1 through 10, inclusive |
| 5:2019cv00070 |
| January 10, 2019 |
| US District Court for the Central District of California |
| Dale S Fischer |
| Kenly Kiya Kato |
| Contract: Other |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1441 |
| Both |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on February 21, 2019. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 9
ORDER SETTING SCHEDULING CONFERENCE by Judge Dale S. Fischer. The Joint Report must include the completed Schedule of Pretrial and Trial dates. Lead trial counsel are ordered to appear in person unless counsel have been excused by the Court. Scheduling Conference set for 6/3/2019 at 11:00 AM before Judge Dale S. Fischer. (rfi)
|
|
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)
|
| Filing 7 NOTICE TO PARTIES OF COURT-DIRECTED ADR PROGRAM filed. (lh) |
| Filing 6 NOTICE OF ASSIGNMENT of Eastern Division Removal Case. This case was initially assigned to District Judge Jesus G. Bernal and referred to Magistrate Judge Kenly Kiya Kato for discovery. Pursuant to General Order 16-05, this case has been randomly reassigned to District Judge Dale S. Fischer. The case number on all documents filed with the Court in this case should read as follows: 5:19-cv-00070 DSF (KKx). (lh) |
| CONFORMED FILED COPY OF ANSWER to Complaint, filed by Defendant Mercedes-Benz USA, LLC. [FILED IN STATE COURT ON 1/10/2019 SUBMITTED ATTACHED TO NOTICE OF REMOVAL](lh) |
| CONFORMED FILED COPY OF DEMAND for Jury Trial filed by Plaintiffs Jose T. Barajas, Karen Guerrero. [FILED IN STATE COURT ON 12/04/2018 SUBMITTED ATTACHED TO NOTICE OF REMOVAL](lh) |
| CONFORMED FILED COPY OF COMPLAINT against Defendants Does, Mercedes-Benz USA, LLC. Filed by Plaintiff Karen Guerrero, Jose T. Barajas. #1 [FILED IN STATE COURT ON 12/04/2018 SUBMITTED ATTACHED TO NOTICE OF REMOVAL] (lh) |
| Filing 5 PROOF OF SERVICE filed by Defendant Mercedes-Benz USA, LLC, re Jury Demand #3 , Civil Cover Sheet (CV-71) #2 , Notice of Removal (Attorney Civil Case Opening), #1 , Notice (Other) #4 of Interested Parties served on January 10, 2019. (Douglas, Benson) |
| Filing 4 NOTICE OF INTERESTED PARTIES filed by Defendant Mercedes-Benz USA, LLC. (Douglas, Benson) |
| Filing 3 DEMAND for Jury Trial filed by Defendant Mercedes-Benz USA, LLC.. (Douglas, Benson) |
| Filing 2 CIVIL COVER SHEET filed by Defendant Mercedes-Benz USA, LLC. (Douglas, Benson) |
| Filing 1 NOTICE OF REMOVAL from State of California for the County of Riverside, case number RIC1826074 Receipt No: 0973-23026085 - Fee: $400, filed by Defendant Mercedes-Benz USA, LLC. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit Plaintiffs' Conformed Superior Court Complaint, #2 Exhibit State Court Answer of Mercedes-Benz USA, LLC) (Attorney Benson Yeager Douglas added to party Mercedes-Benz USA, LLC(pty:dft))(Douglas, Benson) |
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 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.
