Joseph Sanchez v. Office Depot, et al
| Joseph Sanchez |
| OFFICE DEPOT, a business of unknown form, ; FIGUEROA RETAIL LLC, a Limited Liability Company, Does 1-10, Figueroa Retail LLC and Office Depot |
| 8:2019cv00577 |
| March 26, 2019 |
| US District Court for the Central District of California |
| Andre Birotte |
| John D Early |
| Civil Rights: Americans with Disabilities - Other |
| 42 U.S.C. § 12101 |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on July 2, 2019. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 18 NOTICE OF DEFICIENCY Re: Request for Entry of Default against Defendant Figueroa Retail LLC, a Limited Liability Company #17 . The Clerk cannot enter the requested relief as: Proof of Service is lacking required information. The Proof of Service of the Summons and Complaint does not indicate the statute under which service was made. Requesting party shall file a new Request/Application with noted deficiencies corrected in order to have default reconsidered. (gk) |
| Filing 17 REQUEST for Clerk to Enter Default against Defendant Figueroa Retail LLC filed by Plaintiff Joseph Sanchez. Request set for hearing on 8/23/2019 at 10:00 AM before Judge Andre Birotte Jr. (Nakano, Jarrod) |
| Filing 16 PROOF OF SERVICE Executed by Plaintiff Joseph Sanchez, upon Defendant Figueroa Retail LLC served on 5/9/2019, answer due 5/30/2019. Service of the Summons and Complaint were executed upon Figueroa Retail LLC in compliance with California Code of Civil Procedure by substituted service at business address and no service by mail was executed.Original Summons NOT returned. (Nakano, Jarrod) |
Filing 15
MINUTES (IN CHAMBERS) Order To Show Cause Regarding Dismissal for Lack of Prosecution by Judge Andre Birotte Jr.: The Court, on its own motion, orders Plaintiff(s) to show cause, in writing, on or before 7/11/2019, why this action should not be dismissed for lack of prosecution. The Order to Show Cause will stand submitted upon the filing of Plaintiff(s) response. Failure to respond to this Order to Show Cause will be deemed consent to the dismissal of the action. Absent a showing of good cause, an action must be dismissed without prejudice if the summons and complaint are not served on a Defendant within 90 days after the complaint is filed. Plaintiff(s) have failed to file a proof of service within 90 days of the filing of the Complaint on the following Defendant(s): Figueroa Retail LLC. Plaintiff(s) can satisfy this order by showing that service was effectuated within the 90 day deadline or by showing good cause for the failure to do so. Court Reporter: N/A. (gk)
|
| Filing 14 (IN CHAMBERS) ORDER DISCHARGING ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE. On June 13, 2019, the Court issued an Order to Show Cause why it should not dismiss this action for lack of prosecution. Plaintiff has filed a response to the Order to Show Cause re Lack of Prosecution on June 13, 2019. The Court deems that response satisfactory, and orders the Order to Show Cause discharged. THERE IS NO PDF DOCUMENT ASSOCIATED WITH THIS ENTRY. (cb) TEXT ONLY ENTRY |
| Filing 13 DEFAULT BY CLERK F.R.Civ.P.55(a) as to Office Depot, a business of unknown form. (lom) |
| Filing 12 REQUEST for Clerk to Enter Default against Defendant Office Depot filed by Plaintiff Joseph Sanchez. Request set for hearing on 8/16/2019 at 10:00 AM before Judge Andre Birotte Jr. (Attachments: #1 Declaration of Jarrod Y. Nakano in Support Thereof) (Nakano, Jarrod) |
|
Filing 11
MINUTES (IN CHAMBERS) Order To Show Cause Regarding Dismissal for Lack of Prosecution by Judge Andre Birotte Jr.: The Court, on its own motion, orders Plaintiff(s) to show cause, in writing, on or before 6/20/2019 why this action should not be dismissed for lack of prosecution. The Order to Show Cause will stand submitted upon the filing of Plaintiff(s) response. Failure to respond to this Order to Show Cause will be deemed consent to the dismissal of the action. Defendant(s) Office Depot did not answer the complaint, yet Plaintiff(s) have failed to request entry of default, pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 55(a). Plaintiff(s) can satisfy this order by seeking entry of default or by dismissing the complaint. Court Reporter: N/A. (gk)
|
| Filing 10 PROOF OF SERVICE Executed by Plaintiff Joseph Sanchez, upon Defendant Office Depot served on 5/9/2019, answer due 5/30/2019. Service of the Summons and Complaint were executed upon Adriana Fukumoto- Manager in compliance with California Code of Civil Procedure by personal service.Original Summons NOT returned. (Nakano, Jarrod) |
| Filing 9 Notice to Parties: ADA Disability Access Litigation Early Mediation Program. (jre) |
|
Filing 8
STANDING ORDER by Judge Andre Birotte Jr. (jre)
|
| Filing 7 21 DAY Summons issued re Complaint #1 as to defendants Figueroa Retail LLC, Office Depot. (esa) |
| Filing 6 NOTICE TO PARTIES OF COURT-DIRECTED ADR PROGRAM filed. (esa) |
| Filing 5 NOTICE OF ASSIGNMENT to District Judge Andre Birotte Jr and Magistrate Judge John D. Early. (esa) |
| Filing 4 CIVIL COVER SHEET filed by Plaintiff Joseph Sanchez. (Nakano, Jarrod) |
| Filing 3 Certificate and NOTICE of Interested Parties filed by Plaintiff Joseph Sanchez, (Nakano, Jarrod) |
| Filing 2 Request for Clerk to Issue Summons on Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening) #1 filed by Plaintiff Joseph Sanchez. (Nakano, Jarrod) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT Receipt No: 0973-23444451 - Fee: $400, filed by Plaintiff Joseph Sanchez. (Attorney Jarrod Yutaka Nakano added to party Joseph Sanchez(pty:pla))(Nakano, Jarrod) |
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.
