Adam Ghadiri v. M. M. Martin, Inc. et al
| Adam Ghadiri |
| Does 1-10, Home Plus Group, Inc. and M. M. Martin, Inc. |
| 8:2019cv01369 |
| July 14, 2019 |
| US District Court for the Central District of California |
| James V Selna |
| Autumn D Spaeth |
| Civil Rights: Americans with Disabilities - Other |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 12101 |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on December 5, 2019. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 17 NOTICE of Change of address by Russell C Handy attorney for Plaintiff Adam Ghadiri. Changing attorneys address to 8033 Linda Vista Road, Suite 200, San Diego, CA 92111. Filed by Plaintiff Adam Ghadiri. (Handy, Russell) |
| Filing 16 JOINT REPORT Rule 26(f) Discovery Plan filed by Plaintiff Adam Ghadiri.. (Price, Dennis) |
| Filing 15 DEFAULT BY CLERK F.R.Civ.P.55(a) as to Home Plus Group, Inc., a California Corporation (es) |
| Filing 14 REQUEST for Clerk to Enter Default against defendant Home Plus Group, Inc. filed by plaintiff Adam Ghadiri. (Attachments: #1 Declaration, #2 Proof of service) (Grace, Phyl) |
| Filing 13 PROOF OF SERVICE filed by plaintiff Adam Ghadiri, re Initial Order Setting R26 Scheduling Conference - form only #9 served on 8/01/2019. (Carson, Chris) |
| Filing 12 First STIPULATION for Extension of Time to File Response as to Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening) #1 filed by defendant M. M. Martin, Inc..(Attorney Zena Mary Kalioundji added to party M. M. Martin, Inc.(pty:dft))(Kalioundji, Zena) |
| Filing 11 PROOF OF SERVICE Executed by Plaintiff Adam Ghadiri, upon Defendant M. M. Martin, Inc. served on 8/2/2019, answer due 8/23/2019. Service of the Summons and Complaint were executed upon carol Scott -the Secretary in compliance with California Code of Civil Procedure by substituted service at business address and by also mailing a copy.Original Summons returned. (Handy, Russell) |
| Filing 10 PROOF OF SERVICE Executed by Plaintiff Adam Ghadiri, upon Defendant Home Plus Group, Inc. served on 8/1/2019, answer due 8/22/2019. Service of the Summons and Complaint were executed upon Many Hoang- mother of agent in compliance with California Code of Civil Procedure by substituted service at home address and by also mailing a copy.Original Summons returned. (Handy, Russell) |
Filing 9
Order Setting Rule 26(f) Scheduling Conference set for 9/16/2019 at 10:30 am before Judge James V. Selna. Counsel shall file the Joint Rule 26 Meeting Report, with the completed Exhibit A, by 9/9/2019. (lb)
|
| Filing 8 INITIAL ORDER FOLLOWING FILING OF COMPLAINT ASSIGNED TO JUDGE SELNA (lb) |
| Filing 7 21 DAY Summons Issued re Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening) #1 as to Defendants Home Plus Group, Inc., M. M. Martin, Inc. (lh) |
| Filing 6 NOTICE TO PARTIES OF COURT-DIRECTED ADR PROGRAM filed. (lh) |
| Filing 5 NOTICE OF ASSIGNMENT to District Judge James V. Selna and Magistrate Judge Autumn D. Spaeth. (lh) |
| Filing 4 Request for Clerk to Issue Summons on Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening) #1 filed by plaintiff Adam Ghadiri. (Handy, Russell) |
| Filing 3 CERTIFICATE of Interested Parties filed by Plaintiff Adam Ghadiri, (Handy, Russell) |
| Filing 2 CIVIL COVER SHEET filed by Plaintiff Adam Ghadiri. (Handy, Russell) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT Receipt No: 0973-24080297 - Fee: $400, filed by plaintiff Adam Ghadiri. (Attorney Russell C Handy added to party Adam Ghadiri(pty:pla))(Handy, Russell) |
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.
