Daniel Rodriguez et al v. Ford Motor Company et al
| Jose Rodriguez Uribe and Daniel Rodriguez |
| Ford Motor Company and Does 1 through 10, inclusive |
| 5:2021cv01073 |
| June 25, 2021 |
| US District Court for the Central District of California |
| Andre Birotte |
| Kenly Kiya Kato |
| Prop. Damage Prod. Liability |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1441 Notice of Removal - Breach of Contract |
| Both |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on September 20, 2021. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 11
ORDER DISMISSING CIVIL ACTION by Judge Andre Birotte Jr.: THE COURT has been advised that this action has been settled #10 . IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that this action is hereby dismissed without costs and without prejudice to the right, upon good cause shown within 90 days, to reopen the action if settlement is not consummated. This Court retains full jurisdiction over this action and this Order shall not prejudice any party to this action. ( Case Terminated. Made JS-6. ) (gk)
|
| Filing 10 NOTICE of Settlement of Case filed by Defendant Ford Motor Company. (Do, Hang) |
|
Filing 9
ORDER SETTING SCHEDULING CONFERENCE by Judge Andre Birotte Jr. Scheduling Conference set for 10/1/2021 at 10:00 AM before Judge Andre Birotte Jr. (tf)
|
|
Filing 8
STANDING ORDER upon filing of the complaint by Judge Andre Birotte Jr. (tf)
|
| Filing 7 NOTICE TO PARTIES OF COURT-DIRECTED ADR PROGRAM filed. (ghap) |
| Filing 6 NOTICE OF ASSIGNMENT of Eastern Division Removal Case and Notice re Consent to proceed before a U.S. Magistrate Judge. This case was initially assigned to District Judge John W. Holcomb and referred to Magistrate Judge Kenly Kiya Kato for discovery. Pursuant to General Order 21-01, this case has been randomly reassigned to District Judge Andre Birotte Jr. The case number on all documents filed with the Court in this case should read as follows: 2:21-cv-01073 AB (KKx). (ghap) |
| NON CONFORM COPY OF ANSWER to Complaint - (Discovery) filed by Defendant Ford Motor Company. (SUBMITTED ATTACHED EXHIBIT B)(ghap) |
| CONFORMED FILED COPY OF COMPLAINT Jury Demanded., filed by plaintiffs Daniel Rodriguez, Jose Rodriguez Uribe. (FILED IN STATE COURT ON 4/15/2021 SUBMITTED ATTACHED EXHIBIT A) (ghap) |
| Filing 5 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE filed by Defendant Ford Motor Company, re Notice of Removal (Attorney Civil Case Opening),,, #1 , Certificate/Notice of Interested Parties #3 , Jury Demand #4 , Civil Cover Sheet (CV-71) #2 served on June 25, 2021. (Do, Hang) |
| Filing 4 DEMAND for Jury Trial filed by Defendant Ford Motor Company.. (Do, Hang) |
| Filing 3 NOTICE of Interested Parties filed by Defendant Ford Motor Company, (Do, Hang) |
| Filing 2 CIVIL COVER SHEET filed by Defendant Ford Motor Company. (Do, Hang) |
| Filing 1 NOTICE OF REMOVAL from San Bernardino, case number CIVSB2110387 Receipt No: BCACDC-31526990 - Fee: $402, filed by Defendant Ford Motor Company. (Attachments: #1 Declaration of Hang A. Do in Support of Defendant's Notice of Removal, #2 Exhibit A to Declaration of Hang A. Do in Support of Defendant's Notice of Removal, #3 Exhibit B to Declaration of Hang A. Do in Support of Defendant's Notice of Removal, #4 Exhibit C to Declaration of Hang A. Do in Support of Defendant's Notice of Removal, #5 Exhibit D to Declaration of Hang A. Do in Support of Defendant's Notice of Removal, #6 Exhibit E to Declaration of Hang A. Do in Support of Defendant's Notice of Removal) (Attorney Hang Thi Alexandra Do added to party Ford Motor Company(pty:dft))(Do, Hang) |
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.
