Martha Pedroza v. United States of America et al
| Martha Pedroza |
| Enri Reyes De Rosas, Does 1 through 10, inclusive, United States Postal Service and United States of America |
| 5:2019cv02056 |
| October 24, 2019 |
| US District Court for the Central District of California |
| Cormac J Carney |
| Kenly Kiya Kato |
| P.I.: Other |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1346 |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on December 17, 2019. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 14 NOTICE OF SUBSTITUTION filed by Federal Defendants Enri Reyes De Rosas, United States Postal Service, United States of America. (Attachments: #1 Proposed Order)(Zatz, Julie) |
| Filing 13 SERVICE UNDER FRCP 5(b)(2)(D) Executed by Plaintiff Martha Pedroza, upon Defendant Service of the Summons and Complaint were executed upon the Clerks Office in compliance with Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. (Ibarra, Steven) |
| Filing 12 SERVICE UNDER FRCP 5(b)(2)(D) Executed by Plaintiff Martha Pedroza, upon Defendant Service of the Summons and Complaint were executed upon the Clerks Office in compliance with Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. (Ibarra, Steven) |
| Filing 11 SERVICE UNDER FRCP 5(b)(2)(D) Executed by Plaintiff Martha Pedroza, upon Defendant Service of the Summons and Complaint were executed upon the Clerks Office in compliance with Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. (Ibarra, Steven) |
| Filing 10 NOTICE of Interested Parties filed by Plaintiff Martha Pedroza, (Ibarra, Steven) |
| Filing 9 CIVIL COVER SHEET filed by Plaintiff Martha Pedroza. (Ibarra, Steven) |
| Filing 8 NOTICE OF DEFICIENCIES in Attorney Case Opening RE: Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening) #3 . The following error(s) was found: No Notice of Interested Parties has been filed. A Notice of Interested Parties must be filed with every partys first appearance. See Local Rule 7.1-1. Counsel must file a Notice of Interested Parties immediately. Failure to do so may be addressed by judicial action, including sanctions. See Local Rule 83-7. Other error(s) with document(s): Duplicate complaint e-filed and erroneously attachment of the Civil Cover Sheet. The Civil Cover Sheet should have been e-filed separately. (et) |
| Filing 7 60 DAY Summons Issued re Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening) #1 as to Defendants Enri Reyes De Rosas, United States Postal Service, United States of America. (et) |
| Filing 6 NOTICE TO PARTIES OF COURT-DIRECTED ADR PROGRAM filed. (et) |
| Filing 5 NOTICE OF ASSIGNMENT to District Judge Cormac J. Carney and Magistrate Judge Kenly Kiya Kato. (et) |
| Filing 4 NOTICE RE INTRA-DISTRICT TRANSFER by Clerk of Court due to incorrect intra-district venue selected by the filer. Case is transferred to the Eastern Division. Case has been assigned to Judge Cormac J. Carney for all further proceedings. Any matters that may be referred to a Magistrate Judge are assigned to Kenly Kiya Kato. New Case Number 5:19-cv-02056-CJC (KKx). (et) |
| Filing 3 COMPLAINT with filing fee previously paid (400 paid on 10/24/2019, receipt number 26L2NL97), filed by Plaintiff Pedroza Martha. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A, #2 Civil Cover Sheet)(Ibarra, Steven) |
| Filing 2 Request for Clerk to Issue Summons on Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening) #1 filed by Plaintif Pedroza Martha. (Ibarra, Steven) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT Receipt No: 0973-24664556 - Fee: $400, filed by Plaintiff Pedroza Martha. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A) (Attorney Steven Ibarra added to party Pedroza Martha(pty:pla))(Ibarra, Steven) |
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.
