Peter Strojnik Sr. v. Shandilya, Inc.
Peter Strojnik, Sr |
Shandilya, Inc. and Shandilya, Inc. doing business as Santa Ana Travel Inn |
8:2020cv00254 |
February 10, 2020 |
US District Court for the Central District of California |
David O Carter |
Autumn D Spaeth |
Civil Rights: Americans with Disabilities - Other |
42 U.S.C. ยง 12101 |
Plaintiff |
Docket Report
This docket was last retrieved on April 2, 2020. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
Document Text |
---|
Filing 15 NOTICE of Plaintiff's Intent To Prosecute Remaining ADA Claim And Request That Motion To Dismiss Be Left on Calendar filed by Defendant Shandilya, Inc.. (Stillman, Philip) |
Filing 14 MINUTES (IN CHAMBERS) by Judge David O. Carter: ORDER DISMISSING PLAINTIFF'S STATE LAW CLAIMS. For the reasons set forth above, the Court DISMISSES WITHOUT PREJUDICE Plaintiffs Unruh Act, negligence, and DPA claims. Given this dismissal, Defendants Motion to Dismiss (Dkt. #9 ) is STRICKEN and can be refiled on or before April 13, 2020 if Plaintiff chooses to proceed in this Court for the remaining federal ADA claim. Finally, the Scheduling Conference previously scheduled for April 13, 2020 is CONTINUED to April 27, 2020 at 8:30AM. (twdb) |
Filing 13 JOINT REPORT Rule 26(f) Discovery Plan ; estimated length of trial 2, filed by Defendant Shandilya, Inc... (Stillman, Philip) |
Filing 12 OPPOSITION to NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction and Failure to State A Claim #9 Mailed to the District Court on May 19, 2020 filed by Plaintiff Peter Strojnik, Sr. (Strojnik, Peter) |
Filing 11 REPLY In support of Motion NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction and Failure to State A Claim #9 filed by Defendant Shandilya, Inc.. (Attachments: #1 Request for Judicial Notice)(Stillman, Philip) |
![]() |
Filing 9 [STRICKEN PURSUANT TO ORDER #14 . NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction and Failure to State A Claim filed by Defendant Shandilya, Inc.. Motion set for hearing on 4/13/2020 at 08:30 AM before Judge David O. Carter. (Attachments: #1 Memorandum, #2 Declaration Of Philip Stillman, #3 Proposed Order) (Attorney Philip H Stillman added to party Shandilya, Inc.(pty:dft)) (Stillman, Philip) Modified on 4/2/2020 (twdb). |
Filing 8 PROOF OF SERVICE Executed by Plaintiff Peter Strojnik, Sr, upon Defendant Shandilya, Inc. dba Santa Ana Travel Inn served on 2/21/2020, answer due 3/13/2020. Service of the Summons and Complaint were executed upon Vijay R. Bhagat Agent for Service of Process in compliance with Federal Rules of Civil Procedure by substituted service upon John Doe Manager apparently in charge. Mailed on 2/21/20. Due diligence attached. Original Summons NOT returned. (twdb) |
![]() |
Filing 6 APPLICATION for Pro Se Litigant to electronically file documents in a specific case filed by plaintiff Peter Strojnik, Sr. (twdb) |
![]() |
Filing 4 NOTICE TO PARTIES OF COURT-DIRECTED ADR PROGRAM filed. (ghap) |
Filing 3 NOTICE OF ASSIGNMENT to District Judge David O. Carter and Magistrate Judge Autumn D. Spaeth. (ghap) |
Filing 2 21 DAY Summons Issued re Complaint - (Discovery), #1 as to Defendant Shandilya, Inc. (ghap) |
Filing 1 COMPLAINT against Defendant Shandilya, Inc. Case assigned to Judge David O. Carter for all further proceedings. Discovery referred to Magistrate Judge Autumn D. Spaeth.(Filing fee $ 400:PAID) Jury Demanded., filed by plaintiff Peter Strojnik, Sr. (ghap) (Additional attachment(s) added on 2/11/2020: #1 CV-71) (ghap). |
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.