Jorge Rodelo v. Genzyme Corporation et al
| Jorge Rodelo |
| Genzyme Corporation and Does 1 through 100 inclusive |
| 5:2024cv00135 |
| January 19, 2024 |
| US District Court for the Central District of California |
| Cormac J Carney |
| Shashi H Kewalramani |
| Personal Inj. Prod. Liability |
| 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Notice of Removal - Product Liability |
| Both |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on March 11, 2024. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 20 REPLY in Support of NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION to Dismiss Case Genzyme Corporation's Notice of Motion and Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff's Complaint Pursuant to Rules 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6); Memorandum of Points and Authorities #14 filed by Defendant Genzyme Corporation. (Killian, Ryan) |
| Filing 19 MEMORANDUM in Opposition to NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION to Dismiss Case Genzyme Corporation's Notice of Motion and Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff's Complaint Pursuant to Rules 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6); Memorandum of Points and Authorities #14 filed by Plaintiff Jorge Rodelo. (Brenes, Troy) |
Filing 18
ORDER by Judge Cormac J. Carney: Granting #16 Plaintiff's MOTION for Extension of Time to Respond to Defendant's Motion to Dismiss. The deadline for Defendant to file a reply brief is moved to 3/11/24, and the Court reschedules the hearing date to 3/25/24 at 1:30 p.m. (twdb)
|
| Filing 17 NOTICE OF LODGING filed Proposed Order re NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response to Defendant's Motion to Dismiss #16 (Attachments: #1 Proposed Order)(Brenes, Troy) |
| Filing 16 NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response to Defendant's Motion to Dismiss filed by Plaintiff Jorge Rodelo. Motion set for hearing on 3/11/2024 at 01:30 PM before Judge Cormac J. Carney. (Attachments: #1 Declaration Troy A. Brenes) (Brenes, Troy) |
| Filing 15 NOTICE OF INTENT by Judge Cormac J. Carney. Scheduling order to be issued on April 11, 2024. (rrp) |
| Filing 14 NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION to Dismiss Case Genzyme Corporation's Notice of Motion and Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff's Complaint Pursuant to Rules 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6); Memorandum of Points and Authorities filed by Defendant Genzyme Corporation. Motion set for hearing on 3/11/2024 at 01:30 PM before Judge Cormac J. Carney. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit 1, #2 Exhibit 2, #3 Exhibit 3, #4 Exhibit 4, #5 Proposed Order) (Killian, Ryan) |
|
Filing 13
ORDER by Judge Cormac J. Carney: Granting #11 Non-Resident Attorney Jennise W. Stubbs APPLICATION to Appear Pro Hac Vice on behalf of Genzyme Corporation, designating Eva M. Weiler as local counsel. (twdb)
|
| Filing 12 NOTICE of Deficiency in Electronically Filed Pro Hac Vice Application RE: APPLICATION of Non-Resident Attorney Jennise W. Stubbs to Appear Pro Hac Vice on behalf of Defendant Genzyme Corporation (Pro Hac Vice Fee - $500 Fee Paid, Receipt No. ACACDC-36797339) #11 . The following error(s) was/were found: Case number incomplete; missing initials of Judge. (ak) |
| Filing 11 APPLICATION of Non-Resident Attorney Jennise W. Stubbs to Appear Pro Hac Vice on behalf of Defendant Genzyme Corporation (Pro Hac Vice Fee - $500 Fee Paid, Receipt No. ACACDC-36797339) filed by Defendant Genzyme Corporation. (Attachments: #1 Proposed Order) (Weiler, Eva Marie) |
| Filing 10 NOTICE OF DEFICIENCIES in Attorney Case Opening RE: Notice of Removal (Attorney Civil Case Opening), #1 . The following error(s) was found: Other error(s) with document(s): It appears the name of an individual known to be a minor is contained in documents filed with the Court. Fed R Civ P 5.2(a) requires that a minor's initials (as opposed to a minor's spell-out name) be used on documents filed with this Court, unless the Court orders otherwise. You are not required to take any action in response to this notice unless the Court so directs. (car) |
| Filing 9 CORRECTED NOTICE OF PRO HAC VICE APPLICATION DUE for Non-Resident Attorney Jennise W. Stubbs. A document recently filed in this case lists you as an out-of-state attorney of record. However, the Court has not been able to locate any record that you are admitted to the Bar of this Court, and you have not filed an application to appear Pro Hac Vice in this case. Accordingly, within 5 business days of the date of this notice, you must either (1) have your local counsel file an application to appear Pro Hac Vice (Form G-64) and pay the applicable fee, or (2) complete the next section of this form and return it to the court at cacd_attyadm@cacd.uscourts.gov. You have been removed as counsel of record from the docket in this case, and you will not be added back to the docket until your Pro Hac Vice status has been resolved. (car) |
| Filing 8 NOTICE OF CLERICAL ERROR: Due to clerical error Notice of Pro Hac Vice Application #7 was issued with the wrong date. Docket 7 item should be disregarded. A corrected notice will issue forthwith. (car) |
| Filing 6 Notice to Counsel Re Consent to Proceed Before a United States Magistrate Judge. (car) |
| Filing 5 NOTICE TO PARTIES OF COURT-DIRECTED ADR PROGRAM filed. (car) |
| Filing 4 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 Jesus G. Bernal and referred to Magistrate Judge Shashi H. Kewalramani for discovery. Pursuant to this Court's General Order in the Matter of Assignment of Cases and Duties to the District Judges, this case has been randomly reassigned to District Judge Cormac J. Carney. The case number on all documents filed with the Court in this case should read as follows: 5:24-cv-00135 CJC (SHKx). (car) |
| Filing 7 [NOTICE OF CLERICAL ERROR ISSUED ON 1/23/2024, SEE ITEM #8 NOTICE OF PRO HAC VICE APPLICATION DUE for Non-Resident Attorney Jennise W. Stubbs. A document recently filed in this case lists you as an out-of-state attorney of record. However, the Court has not been able to locate any record that you are admitted to the Bar of this Court, and you have not filed an application to appear Pro Hac Vice in this case. Accordingly, within 5 business days of the date of this notice, you must either (1) have your local counsel file an application to appear Pro Hac Vice (Form G-64) and pay the applicable fee, or (2) complete the next section of this form and return it to the court at cacd_attyadm@cacd.uscourts.gov. You have been removed as counsel of record from the docket in this case, and you will not be added back to the docket until your Pro Hac Vice status has been resolved. (car) Modified on 1/23/2024 (car). |
| CONFORMED COPY OF COMPLAINT against Defendants Does 1 through 100, inclusive, Genzyme Corporation. Jury Demanded, filed by Plaintiff Jorge Rodelo. Filed in State Court on 11/14/2023 Submitted with Attachment 1 to Notice of Removal #1 (car) |
| Filing 3 PROOF OF SERVICE filed by Defendant Genzyme Corporation, re Notice of Removal (Attorney Civil Case Opening), #1 , Corporate Disclosure Statement #2 served on January 19, 2024. (Killian, Ryan) |
| Filing 2 CORPORATE DISCLOSURE STATEMENT filed by Defendant Genzyme Corporation identifying Sanofi as Corporate Parent. (Killian, Ryan) |
| Filing 1 NOTICE OF REMOVAL from Riverside, case number CVRI2306093 Receipt No: ACACDC-36760875 - Fee: $405, filed by Defendant Genzyme Corporation. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit 1, #2 Civil Cover Sheet) (Attorney Ryan S Killian added to party Genzyme Corporation(pty:dft))(Killian, Ryan) |
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.
