Bryan Williams v. Norman Jack Shafer et al
| Bryan Williams |
| Kings Auto, Norman Jack Shafer and Does 1-10, inclusive |
| 8:2019cv01715 |
| September 9, 2019 |
| US District Court for the Central District of California |
| Karen E Scott |
| Josephine L Staton |
| 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 November 12, 2019. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 14 WITHDRAWAL of filed by Plaintiff Bryan Williams. (Cornell, Ross) |
Filing 13
MINUTE (IN CHAMBERS) ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE RE SUPPLEMENTAL JURISDICTION by Judge Josephine L. Staton: Plaintiff is ORDERED to show cause, in writing, no later than ten (10) days from the date of this Order, why the Court should not decline to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over Plaintiff's Unruh Act claim. Failure to timely or adequately respond may, without further warning, result in dismissal of the entire action without prejudice or the Court declining to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over Plaintiff's Unruh Act claim and the dismissal of that claim pursuant to 28 USC 1367(c). (jp) Modified on 10/25/2019 (jp).
|
| Filing 12 STIPULATION Extending Time to Answer the complaint as to Kings Auto answer now due 11/1/2019; Norman Jack Shafer answer now due 11/3/2019, re Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening) #1 filed by Defendants Kings Auto; Norman Jack Shafer.(Attorney Gregory E Woodard added to party Kings Auto(pty:dft), Attorney Gregory E Woodard added to party Norman Jack Shafer(pty:dft))(Woodard, Gregory) |
| Filing 11 PROOF OF SERVICE Executed by Plaintiff Bryan Williams, upon Defendant Kings Auto served on 9/11/2019, answer due 10/2/2019. Service of the Summons and Complaint were executed upon Kings Auto by John Doe (Ray) Manager in compliance with Federal Rules of Civil Procedure by substituted service at business address and by also mailing a copy.Original Summons NOT returned. (Cornell, Ross) |
| Filing 10 PROOF OF SERVICE Executed by Plaintiff Bryan Williams, upon Defendant Norman Jack Shafer served on 9/13/2019, answer due 10/4/2019. Service of the Summons and Complaint were executed upon Norman Jack Shafer bu David Kim, Manager in compliance with Federal Rules of Civil Procedure by substituted service at business address and by also mailing a copy.Original Summons NOT returned. (Cornell, Ross) |
| Filing 9 Notice to Parties: ADA Disability Access Litigation. (tg) |
| Filing 8 INITIAL STANDING ORDER FOR CASES ASSIGNED TO JUDGE JOSEPHINE L. STATON. (tg) |
| Filing 7 21 DAY Summons Issued re Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening) #1 as to Defendants Kings Auto, Norman Jack Shafer. (car) |
| Filing 6 NOTICE TO PARTIES OF COURT-DIRECTED ADR PROGRAM filed. (car) |
| Filing 5 NOTICE OF ASSIGNMENT to District Judge Josephine L. Staton and Magistrate Judge Karen E. Scott. (car) |
| Filing 4 Request for Clerk to Issue Summons on Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening) #1 filed by plaintiff Bryan Williams. (Cornell, Ross) |
| Filing 3 NOTICE of Interested Parties filed by Plaintiff Bryan Williams, (Cornell, Ross) |
| Filing 2 CIVIL COVER SHEET filed by Plaintiff Bryan Williams. (Cornell, Ross) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT Receipt No: 0973-24399048 - Fee: $400, filed by plaintiff Bryan Williams. (Attorney Ross Cornell added to party Bryan Williams(pty:pla))(Cornell, Ross) |
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.
