United Specialty Insurance Company v. Green Med Trans, Inc.
| DOES 1 through 50 |
| United Specialty Insurance Company, Green Med Trans, Inc., Michael Cambria, Syed Farman Ali Rizvi, Robert Stutz and Pepe's Inc. |
| 5:2023cv01092 |
| June 9, 2023 |
| US District Court for the Central District of California |
| Maame Ewusi-Mensah Frimpong |
| Sheri Pym |
| Insurance |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1391 Personal Injury |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on July 26, 2023. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 10 [FILED AS *STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME TO RESPOND TO INITIAL COMPLAINT BY NOT MORE THAN 30 DAYS (L.R. 8-3)*] STIPULATION to Certify Class, STIPULATION Extending Time to Answer the complaint as to Pepe's Inc. answer now due 8/30/2023; Robert Stutz answer now due 8/30/2023, re Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening) #7 filed by Defendants Pepe's Inc.; Robert Stutz.(Attorney Zackary Terzakarian added to party Pepe's Inc.(pty:dft), Attorney Zackary Terzakarian added to party Robert Stutz(pty:dft))(Terzakarian, Zackary) Modified on 7/28/2023 (yl). |
| Filing 9 STIPULATION Extending Time to Answer the complaint as to Michael Cambria answer now due 8/22/2023, re Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening) #1 filed by defendant Michael Cambria.(Attorney Scott E Saunders added to party Michael Cambria(pty:dft))(Saunders, Scott) |
| Filing 8 TEXT ONLY ENTRY by Judge Maame Ewusi-Mensah Frimpong. This matter has been assigned to District Judge Maame Ewusi-Mensah Frimpong. The Court refers counsel to the Court's Initial Standing Order found on the Court's website under Judge Frimpong's Procedures and Schedules. Please read the Standing Order carefully. It is the responsibilities of the parties to maintain familiarly with the Standing Order and any future amendments that the Court may issue by periodically checking the Court's website for the operative version of the Standing Order. IT IS SO ORDERED. THERE IS NO PDF DOCUMENT ASSOCIATED WITH THIS ENTRY. (kd) TEXT ONLY ENTRY |
| Filing 7 COMPLAINT with filing fee previously paid ($402 paid on 06/09/2023, receipt number ACACDC-35467119), filed by Plaintiff United Specialty Insurance Company. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet Civil Cover Sheet)(Levinson, Michele) |
| Filing 6 NOTICE OF DEFICIENCIES in Attorney Case Opening. The following error(s) was found: The Civil Cover Sheet (CV-71)is missing or incomplete. All civil actions presented for filing must be accompanied by a completed Civil Cover Sheet. See Local Rule 3-1. Counsel must file a completed Civil Cover Sheet immediately. Failure to do so may be addressed by judicial action, including sanctions. See Local Rule 83-7. (jtil) |
| Filing 5 Notice to Counsel Re Consent to Proceed Before a United States Magistrate Judge. (jtil) |
| Filing 4 NOTICE TO PARTIES OF COURT-DIRECTED ADR PROGRAM filed. (jtil) |
| Filing 3 NOTICE OF ASSIGNMENT to District Judge Maame Ewusi-Mensah Frimpong and Magistrate Judge Sheri Pym. (jtil) |
| Filing 2 NOTICE of Interested Parties filed by Plaintiff United Specialty Insurance Company, identifying United Specialty Insurance Company. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet)(Levinson, Michele) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT Receipt No: ACACDC-35467119 - Fee: $402, filed by Plaintiff United Specialty Insurance Company. (Attorney Michele L Levinson added to party United Specialty Insurance Company(pty:bkmov))(Levinson, Michele) |
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.
