Arisha Byars v. Whirlpool Corp. et al
| Arisha Byars |
| Whirlpool Corporation, Does 1 through 25, inclusive and Whirlpool Corp. |
| 5:2022cv02030 |
| November 16, 2022 |
| US District Court for the Central District of California |
| Shashi H Kewalramani |
| Josephine L Staton |
| Contract: Other |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1441 Notice of Removal -- Other Contract |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on January 13, 2023. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 13 STIPULATION for Extension of Time to File Response to Initial Complaint filed by Defendant Whirlpool Corp.. (Attachments: #1 Proposed Order)(Straus, Rachel) |
Filing 12
ORDER APPROVING STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME TO RESPOND TO INITIAL COMPLAINT (Doc. #10 ) by Judge Josephine L. Staton that the deadline for Defendant to respond to Plaintiff's complaint shall be continued for 21 days to 1/13/2023. (jp)
|
| Filing 11 INITIAL STANDING ORDER FOR CIVIL CASES ASSIGNED TO JUDGE JOSEPHINE L. STATON. (vv) |
| Filing 10 STIPULATION to Continue Time to Respond to the Complaint from December 23, 2022 to January 13, 2023 filed by Defendant Whirlpool Corp.. (Attachments: #1 Proposed Order)(Straus, Rachel) |
|
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 Josephine L. Staton for all further proceedings. The case number will now reflect the initials of the transferee Judge 5:22-cv-02030 JLS(SHKx). (rn)
|
| Filing 8 STIPULATION Extending Time to Answer the complaint as to Whirlpool Corp. answer now due 12/23/2022, re Complaint - (Discovery) filed by Defendant Whirlpool Corp..(Straus, Rachel) |
| Filing 7 Notice to Counsel Re Consent to Proceed Before a United States Magistrate Judge. (lh) |
| Filing 6 NOTICE TO PARTIES OF COURT-DIRECTED ADR PROGRAM filed. (lh) |
| Filing 5 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 Sunshine Suzanne Sykes and referred to Magistrate Judge Shashi H. Kewalramani for discovery. Pursuant to General Order 21-01, this case has been randomly reassigned to District Judge Christina A. Snyder. The case number on all documents filed with the Court in this case should read as follows: 5:22-cv-02030 CAS (SHKx). (lh) |
| CONFORMED FILED COPY OF CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT against Defendants Does, Whirlpool Corp., filed by Plaintiff Arisha Byars. (FILED IN SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT ON 7/25/2022 SUBMITTED ATTACHED TO NOTICE OF REMOVAL #1 ) (lh) |
| Filing 4 PROOF OF SERVICE filed by Defendant Whirlpool Corporation, re Civil Cover Sheet (CV-71) #2 , Notice of Removal (Attorney Civil Case Opening), #1 , Certificate/Notice of Interested Parties #3 served on November 16, 2022. (Straus, Rachel) |
| Filing 3 CERTIFICATE of Interested Parties filed by Defendant Whirlpool Corporation, (Straus, Rachel) |
| Filing 2 CIVIL COVER SHEET filed by Defendant Whirlpool Corporation. (Straus, Rachel) |
| Filing 1 NOTICE OF REMOVAL from Superior Court of San Bernardino, case number CIVSB2215944 Receipt No: ACACDC-34333797 - Fee: $402, filed by Defendant Whirlpool Corporation. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A, #2 Exhibit B, #3 Request for Judicial Notice, #4 Exhibit 1) (Attorney Rachel Aleeza Straus added to party Whirlpool Corporation(pty:dft))(Straus, Rachel) |
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.
