Shawna Palermo v. Target Corporation
| Shawna Palermo |
| TARGET CORPORATION and Does 1 through 10, inclusive |
| 5:2020cv01989 |
| September 25, 2020 |
| US District Court for the Central District of California |
| John A Kronstadt |
| Sheri Pym |
| P.I.: Other |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1446 |
| Defendant |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on December 28, 2020. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 13 JOINT REPORT Rule 26(f) Discovery Plan ; estimated length of trial 5 days, filed by Plaintiff Shawna Palermo.. (Reiter, Michael) |
Filing 12
ORDER SETTING RULE 16(b)/26(f) SCHEDULING CONFERENCE by Judge John A. Kronstadt. Counsel shall file a Joint Report consistent with this Order. A hearing is not necessary and, therefore, the matter is taken under submission. Upon review of the Joint Report, a scheduling order will be issued. Rule 26 Meeting Report due by 12/28/2020. (pbl)
|
| Filing 11 NOTICE OF SERVICE OF STANDING ORDERS FOR CIVIL CASES ASSIGNED TO JUDGE JOHN A. KRONSTADT filed by Defendant Target Corporation Target Corporation. (Hahn, Adrienne) |
| Filing 10 ANSWER to Complaint - (Discovery) 7 with JURY DEMAND filed by Defendant Target Corporation Target Corporation.(Hahn, Adrienne) |
|
Filing 9
STANDING ORDERS FOR CIVIL CASES ASSIGNED TO JUDGE JOHN A. KRONSTADT upon filing of the complaint by Judge John A. Kronstadt. Please read each Order carefully as they differ in some respects from the Local Rules. Counsel are advised that the Court, at any time, may amend one or more of its Standing Orders. It is the responsibility of counsel to refer to this Court&s Procedures and Schedules found on the website for the United States District Court, Central District of California (www.cacd.uscourts.gov) to obtain the operative order. The Court thanks the parties and their counsel for their anticipated cooperation in carrying out these requirements. (vv)
|
| Filing 8 NOTICE of Assignment of Eastern Division Removal Case filed by Defendant Target Corporation Target Corporation. (Hahn, Adrienne) |
| Filing 6 NOTICE TO PARTIES OF COURT-DIRECTED ADR PROGRAM filed. (lh) |
| Filing 5 NOTICE OF ASSIGNMENT of Eastern Division Removal Case. This case was initially assigned to District Judge Jesus G. Bernal and referred to Magistrate Judge Sheri Pym for discovery. Pursuant to General Order 19-03, this case has been randomly reassigned to District Judge John A. Kronstadt. The case number on all documents filed with the Court in this case should read as follows: 5:20-cv-01989 JAK (SPx). (lh) |
| FILING FEE PAID for new civil case. Receipt No. ACACDC-28275669 for $400 filing fee. (Hahn, Adrienne) |
| Filing 7 CONFORMED FILED COPY OF COMPLAINT against Defendants Does 1 through 10, Target Corporation, filed by Plaintiff Shawna Palermo. (FILED IN SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT ON 8/04/2020 SUBMITTED ATTACHED TO NOTICE OF REMOVAL #1 ) (lh) |
| Filing 4 NOTICE filed by Defendant Target Corporation TARGET CORPORATION. (Hahn, Adrienne) |
| Filing 3 CERTIFICATE of Interested Parties filed by Defendant Target Corporation TARGET CORPORATION, (Hahn, Adrienne) |
| Filing 2 CIVIL COVER SHEET filed by Defendant TARGET CORPORATION. (Hahn, Adrienne) |
| Filing 1 NOTICE OF REMOVAL from San Bernardino, case number CIVDS2015144 with filing fee previously paid receipt number pay.gov system down. Unable to pay.), filed by Defendant Target Corporation TARGET CORPORATION. (Attorney Adrienne R Hahn added to party TARGET CORPORATION(pty:dft))(Hahn, Adrienne) |
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.
