Sam Benford v. Ruben Torres et al
Sam Benford |
Ruben Torres and Does 1 to 10 |
5:2022cv00902 |
June 1, 2022 |
US District Court for the Central District of California |
Sheri Pym |
Civil Rights: Americans with Disabilities - Other |
42 U.S.C. ยง 12101 Americans With Disabilities Act |
Plaintiff |
Docket Report
This docket was last retrieved on July 28, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
Document Text |
---|
Filing 8 STATEMENT Statement of Consent to Proceed Before a United States Magistrate Judge filed by Defendant Ruben Torres (Hornbuckle III, James) |
Filing 7 ANSWER to Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening) #1 filed by Defendant Ruben Torres. (Attachments: #1 Certificate of Service)(Attorney James Dixon Hornbuckle III added to party Ruben Torres(pty:dft))(Hornbuckle III, James) |
Filing 6 21 DAY Summons Issued re Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening) #1 as to Defendant Ruben Torres. (et) |
Filing 5 NOTICE TO COUNSEL re Magistrate Judge Direct Assignment Program. This case has been randomly assigned to Magistrate Judge Sheri Pym. (Attachments: #1 CV11C Statement of Consent) (et) |
Filing 4 Request for Clerk to Issue Summons on Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening) #1 Sam Benford. (Kim, Jason) |
Filing 3 CERTIFICATE of Interested Parties (Kim, Jason) |
Filing 2 CIVIL COVER SHEET filed by Plaintiff Sam Benford. (Kim, Jason) |
Filing 1 COMPLAINT Receipt No: ACACDC-33394553 - Fee: $402. (Attorney Jason J Kim added to party Sam Benford(pty:pla))(Kim, Jason) |
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.