Miguel Licea v. Puma North America, Inc.
Miguel Licea |
Puma North America, Inc. and Does 1 through 25, inclusive |
5:2022cv01939 |
November 2, 2022 |
US District Court for the Central District of California |
Kenly Kiya Kato |
Sunshine Suzanne Sykes |
Other Fraud |
28 U.S.C. ยง 1441 Notice of Removal |
None |
Docket Report
This docket was last retrieved on November 2, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
Document Text |
---|
Filing 4 Notice of Appearance or Withdrawal of Counsel: for attorney Megan A Suehiro counsel for Defendant Puma North America, Inc.. Adding Megan A. Suehiro as counsel of record for Puma North America, Inc. for the reason indicated in the G-123 Notice. Filed by Defendant Puma North America, Inc.. (Attachments: #1 Proof of Service)(Suehiro, Megan) |
Filing 3 NOTICE of Interested Parties filed by Defendant Puma North America, Inc., identifying PUMA Mostro GmbH, PUMA Suede Holdings, Inc., PUMA Sprint GmbH, and PUMA SE. (Attachments: #1 Proof of Service)(Suehiro, Megan) |
Filing 2 CIVIL COVER SHEET filed by Defendant Puma North America, Inc.. (Attachments: #1 Proof of Service)(Suehiro, Megan) |
Filing 1 NOTICE OF REMOVAL from San Bernardino County Superior Court, case number CIVSB2216492 Receipt No: ACACDC-34261369 - Fee: $402, filed by Defendant Puma North America, Inc.. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A - Filed and Served Complaint, #2 Proof of Service) (Attorney Megan A Suehiro added to party Puma North America, Inc.(pty:dft))(Suehiro, Megan) |
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.