Mark Williams v. Victor V. Kitt, M.D.
| Mark Williams |
| Victor Kitt and Victor V. Kitt, M.D. |
| 5:2020cv02650 |
| December 24, 2020 |
| US District Court for the Central District of California |
| John W Holcomb |
| Alka Sagar |
| Civil Rights: Other |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on July 22, 2021. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 17
NOTICE OF DISCREPANCY AND ORDER: by Magistrate Judge Alka Sagar, ORDERING Letter (Dated January 24, 2021) submitted by Plaintiff Mark Williams, received on February 9, 2021, is not to be filed but instead rejected. Denial based on: Local Rule 83-2.5 No letters to the judge. (Attachments: #1 Denied Filing) (hr)
|
|
Filing 16
NOTICE OF DISCREPANCY AND ORDER: by Magistrate Judge Alka Sagar, ORDERING Letter (Dated January 17, 2021) submitted by Plaintiff Mark Williams, received on February 9, 2021, is not to be filed but instead rejected. Denial based on: Local Rule 83-2.5 No letters to the judge. (Attachments: #1 Denied Filing) (hr)
|
|
Filing 15
ORDER REGARDING SCREENING IN PRO SE CIVIL RIGHTS CASE by Magistrate Judge Alka Sagar. Until the Complaint has been screened and the Court has ordered that service of process may occur, Plaintiff may not proceed with service of process on any Defendant. (see document for further details) (hr)
|
|
Filing 14
ORDER VACATING REFERENCE TO MAGISTRATE JUDGE by Judge John W. Holcomb. Reference of discovery to Magistrate Judge Sheri Pym is vacated. Case transferred to the calendar of Magistrate Judge Alka Sagar for Report and Recommendation. Case number now reads as 5:20-cv-02650-JWH-(AS). (ap)
|
|
Filing 13
ORDER GRANTING REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF SUBSTITUTION OR WITHDRAWAL OF ATTORNEY by Judge John W. Holcomb #12 . Mark D. Williams is substituted in as propria persona, instead of Benjamin Pavone. Benjamine Pavone terminated. (yl)
|
| Filing 12 REQUEST TO SUBSTITUTE ATTORNEY Mark Williams (pro se) in place of attorney Benjamin L Pavone filed by Plaintiff Mark Williams. (Attachments: #1 Proposed Order) (Pavone, Benjamin) |
| Filing 11 RESPONSE BY THE COURT TO NOTICE TO FILER OF DEFICIENCIES IN ELECTRONICALLY FILED DOCUMENTS RE: Deficiency in Electronically Filed Documents (G-112A) - optional html form,, #10 by Deputy Clerk of Court. The document is hereby STRICKEN. Counsel may refile the Request for Approval of Substitution or Withdrawal of Counsel (G-01) ("Request") using the correct event, as indicated in the Notice of Deficiencies [ECF. 10]. In addition, a Proposed Order (G-01 ORDER) must be submitted with the Request at the time of filing. Counsel is referred to the Court's website for further information pertaining to an appearance or withdrawal (http://www.cacd.uscourts.gov/attorneys) and reminded to comply with L.R. 5-4.4.1 and L.R. 5-4.4.2. (iva) |
| Filing 10 NOTICE TO FILER OF DEFICIENCIES in Electronically Filed Documents RE: Notice of Appearance #9 . The following error(s) was/were found: Proposed Document was not submitted as separate attachment. Incorrect event selected. Correct event to be used is: Applications/Ex Parte Applications/Motions/Petitions/---Requests>>Substitution of Attorney (G-01). In response to this notice, the Court may: (1) order an amended or correct document to be filed; (2) order the document stricken; or (3) take other action as the Court deems appropriate. You need not take any action in response to this notice unless and until the Court directs you to do so. (yl) |
| Filing 9 NOTICE of Appearance filed by attorney Benjamin Pavone on behalf of Plaintiff Mark Williams (Pavone, Benjamin) |
| Filing 8 NOTICE TO FILER OF DEFICIENCIES in Electronically Filed Documents RE: Miscellaneous Document #6 . The following error(s) was/were found: Incorrect event selected. Correct event to be used is: Notice>>Certificate/Notice of Interested Parties. In response to this notice, the Court may: (1) order an amended or correct document to be filed; (2) order the document stricken; or (3) take other action as the Court deems appropriate. You need not take any action in response to this notice unless and until the Court directs you to do so. (yl) |
|
Filing 7
STANDING ORDER by Judge John W. Holcomb. (iva)
|
| Filing 6 Notice of Interested Parties re: Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening) #1 (Pavone, Benjamin) |
| Filing 5 NOTICE OF DEFICIENCIES in Attorney Case Opening RE: Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening) #1 . The following error(s) was found: Other error(s) with document(s): Attachments No. 1 Civil Cover Sheet should not have been attached to Docket Entry No. 1. Each document should have been filed separately. You are not required to take any action to correct this deficiency unless the Court so directs. (lh) |
| Filing 4 NOTICE OF DEFICIENCIES in Attorney Case Opening. 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. (lh) |
| Filing 3 NOTICE TO PARTIES OF COURT-DIRECTED ADR PROGRAM filed. (lh) |
| Filing 2 NOTICE OF ASSIGNMENT to District Judge John W. Holcomb and Magistrate Judge Sheri Pym. (lh) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT Receipt No: ACACDC-29704021 - Fee: $402, filed by Plaintiff Mark Williams. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet) (Attorney Benjamin Pavone added to party Mark Williams(pty:pla))(Pavone, Benjamin) |
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.
