Jose L. Gonzalez et al v. Mercedes-Benz USA, LLC
| Jose L. Gonzalez and Gloria Sedeno |
| Mercedes-Benz USA, LLC |
| 5:2021cv01977 |
| November 22, 2021 |
| US District Court for the Central District of California |
| Michael R Wilner |
| Otis D Wright |
| Contract: Other |
| 28 U.S.C. § 1332 |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on January 18, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 20 DECLARATION of Kevin Jacobson In Support of EX PARTE APPLICATION for Relief from Pursant to FRCP Rule 6(b)(1)(B) and Rule 60(b)(1) or in the Alternative, for Leave to File an Amended Complaint re Judgment, #18 #19 filed by Plaintiffs Jose L. Gonzalez, Gloria Sedeno. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit 1)(Jacobson, Kevin) |
| Filing 19 EX PARTE APPLICATION for Relief from Pursant to FRCP Rule 6(b)(1)(B) and Rule 60(b)(1) or in the Alternative, for Leave to File an Amended Complaint re Judgment, #18 filed by plaintiff Jose L. Gonzalez, Gloria Sedeno. (Attachments: #1 Proposed Order) (Jacobson, Kevin) |
| Filing 18 JUDGMENT by Judge Otis D. Wright, II: Pursuant to the Court's Order Granting Defendant Mercedes-Benz USA, LLC's Motion to Dismiss #17 , it is therefore ORDERED, ADJUDGED, and DECREED as follows: 1. Plaintiffs shall recover nothing from Defendant; and 2. Plaintiffs' Complaint is dismissed on the merits and with prejudice. (MD JS-6, Case Terminated). (lc) |
Filing 17
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO DISMISS #15 AS UNOPPOSED by Judge Otis D. Wright, II: The Court deems the matter appropriate for decision without oral. Accordingly, the January 24, 2022 hearing is VACATED. The Court construes Plaintiffs' failure to respond to Defendants Motion as consent to the Court granting it. Accordingly, pursuant to Local Rule 7-12 and Ghazali, the Court GRANTS Defendant's Motion and DISMISSES Plaintiffs' Complaint. The Court will issue Judgment. (lc)
|
| Filing 16 NOTICE TO FILER OF DEFICIENCIES in Electronically Filed Documents RE: Notice (Other) #14 by Mercedes-Benz USA, LLC. The following error(s) was/were found: Incorrect event selected. Correct event to be used is: Notice: Certificate/Notice of Interested Parties.. Other error(s) with document(s): Note: To assist in a search for correct events, please use the "SEARCH" option for a "key word" to narrow the selection process. 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. (lc) |
| Filing 15 NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION to Dismiss Case and or Strike Portions of Plaintiffs' Complaint filed by Defendant Mercedes-Benz USA, LLC. Motion set for hearing on 1/24/2022 at 01:30 PM before Judge Otis D. Wright II. (Attachments: #1 Declaration of Mehgan Gallagher, #2 Proposed Order) (Attorney Soheyl Tahsildoost added to party Mercedes-Benz USA, LLC(pty:dft)) (Tahsildoost, Soheyl) |
| Filing 14 NOTICE of Interested Parties filed by Defendant Mercedes-Benz USA, LLC. (Tahsildoost, Soheyl) |
| Filing 13 CORPORATE DISCLOSURE STATEMENT of Defendant Mercedes-Benz USA, LLC, a Delaware Limited Liability Company filed by Defendant Mercedes-Benz USA, LLC identifying Daimler North America Corporation as Corporate Parent. (Tahsildoost, Soheyl) |
| Filing 12 NOTICE of Appearance of Mehgan Gallagher filed by Defendant Mercedes-Benz USA, LLC. (Tahsildoost, Soheyl) |
| Filing 11 NOTICE of Appearance of Soheyl Tahsildoost filed by Defendant Mercedes-Benz USA, LLC. (Tahsildoost, Soheyl) |
| Filing 10 PROOF OF SERVICE Executed by Plaintiff Jose L. Gonzalez, Gloria Sedeno, upon Defendant Mercedes-Benz USA, LLC served on 11/30/2021, answer due 12/21/2021. Service of the Summons and Complaint were executed upon Diana Ruiz in compliance with Federal Rules of Civil Procedure by personal service.Original Summons returned. (Jacobson, Kevin) |
|
Filing 9
ORDER RETURNING CASE FOR REASSIGNMENT by Judge Christina A. Snyder. ORDER case returned to the Clerk for random reassignment pursuant to General Order 21-01. Case randomly reassigned from Judge Christina A. Snyder to Judge Otis D. Wright, II for all further proceedings. The case number will now reflect the initials of the transferee Judge 5:21-cv-01977 ODW(MRWx). (rn)
|
| Filing 8 21 DAY Summons Issued re Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening) #1 as to Defendant Mercedes-Benz USA, LLC. (et) |
| Filing 7 Notice to Counsel Re Consent to Proceed Before a United States Magistrate Judge. (et) |
| Filing 6 NOTICE TO PARTIES OF COURT-DIRECTED ADR PROGRAM filed. (et) |
| Filing 5 NOTICE OF ASSIGNMENT to District Judge Christina A. Snyder and Magistrate Judge Michael R. Wilner. (et) |
| Filing 4 Request for Clerk to Issue Summons on Certificate/Notice of Interested Parties #3 , Civil Cover Sheet (CV-71) #2 , Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening), #1 filed by plaintiff Jose L. Gonzalez, Gloria Sedeno. (Jacobson, Kevin) |
| Filing 3 CERTIFICATE of Interested Parties filed by Plaintiff Jose L. Gonzalez, Gloria Sedeno, (Jacobson, Kevin) |
| Filing 2 CIVIL COVER SHEET filed by Plaintiffs Jose L. Gonzalez, Gloria Sedeno. (Jacobson, Kevin) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT Receipt No: ACACDC-32366016 - Fee: $402, filed by plaintiff Jose L. Gonzalez, Gloria Sedeno. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A) (Attorney Kevin Y Jacobson added to party Jose L. Gonzalez(pty:pla), Attorney Kevin Y Jacobson added to party Gloria Sedeno(pty:pla))(Jacobson, Kevin) |
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.
