Frank D. Luer v. U.S. Bank, N.A. et al
Plaintiff: Frank D. Luer and Frank D Luer
Defendant: Does 1 to 10, inclusive and U.S. Bank, N.A.
Case Number: 8:2020cv00321
Filed: February 18, 2020
Court: US District Court for the Central District of California
Presiding Judge: David O Carter
Referring Judge: Karen E Scott
Nature of Suit: Personal Property: Other
Cause of Action: 28:1332
Jury Demanded By: Plaintiff
Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on April 17, 2020. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
April 17, 2020 Filing 20 SCHEDULING NOTICE by Judge David O. Carter. The Court finds the Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction #9 appropriate for decision without oral argument. Fed. R. Civ. P. 78; Local Rule 7-15. Accordingly, the hearing set for April 20, 2020 is removed from the calendar and the motion is taken under submission. No appearances are necessary on this date and time. THERE IS NO PDF DOCUMENT ASSOCIATED WITH THIS ENTRY. (kd) TEXT ONLY ENTRY
April 14, 2020 Filing 19 REPLY in support of NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction #9 filed by Defendant U.S. Bank, N.A.. (Petersen, Nicholas)
April 8, 2020 Filing 18 SCHEDULING NOTICE by Judge David O. Carter. Docket entry #17 was issued in error. Counsel shall disregard this entry. Item #17 is stricken by the Court. THERE IS NO PDF DOCUMENT ASSOCIATED WITH THIS ENTRY. (kd) TEXT ONLY ENTRY
April 8, 2020 Opinion or Order Filing 17 [STRICKEN BY COURT, issued in error] MINUTE ORDER IN CHAMBERS by Judge David O. Carter:In order to address the ostensibly inadequate sanitation facilities in Skid Row and the surrounding area, the Court hereby ORDERS Defendants City of Los Angeles and County of Los Angeles to submit a status report on Defendants plans for maintaining and servicing the sanitation facilities, such that the local community will have sufficient access to functioning sanitation facilities to mitigate the spread of coronavirus. Defendants City of Los Angeles and County of Los Angeles shall file the ordered status report, whether separately or jointly, within 48 hours, i.e., by 12:00 noon on Friday, April 10, 2020. (kd) Modified on 4/8/2020 (kd).
April 8, 2020 Filing 16 SCHEDULING NOTICE by Judge David O. Carter. The Request for Extension of Time to File Opposition to the Noticed Motion to Dismiss Complaint for Lack of Personal Service; and in the alternative for Forum Non Conveniens filed by plaintiff Frank D Luer #12 is denied as moot.THERE IS NO PDF DOCUMENT ASSOCIATED WITH THIS ENTRY. (kd) TEXT ONLY ENTRY
April 6, 2020 Filing 15 PROOF OF SERVICE Executed by Plaintiff Frank D Luer, upon Defendant U.S. Bank, N.A. served on 3/4/2020, answer due 3/25/2020. Service of the Summons and Complaint were executed upon Dawn Hurdelbrink-Evans, Paralegal in compliance with statute not specified by (manner of service not specified).Original Summons returned. (twdb)
April 6, 2020 Filing 14 DECLARATION of Frank D. Luer in support of the Opposition (Motion related) #13 filed by Plaintiff Frank D Luer. (twdb)
April 6, 2020 Filing 13 Opposition to the NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction or alternative for forum non conveniens; points and authorities; declaration #9 filed by Plaintiff Frank D Luer. (twdb)
April 6, 2020 Filing 12 REQUEST for Extension of Time to File Opposition to the Noticed Motion to Dismiss Complaint for Lack of Personal Service; and in the alternative for Forum Non Conveniens filed by plaintiff Frank D Luer. Lodged proposed order. Request set for hearing on 4/20/2020 at 08:30 AM before Judge David O. Carter. (twdb) (Additional attachment(s) added on 4/6/2020: #1 Proposed Order) (twdb).
March 18, 2020 Opinion or Order Filing 11 ORDER SETTING SCHEDULING CONFERENCE by Judge David O. Carter. Scheduling Conference set for 4/20/2020 at 08:30 AM before Judge David O. Carter. (kd)
March 17, 2020 Filing 10 NOTICE of Interested Parties filed by Defendant U.S. Bank, N.A., identifying U.S. Bancorp. (Petersen, Nicholas)
March 17, 2020 Filing 9 NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction filed by Defendant U.S. Bank, N.A.. Motion set for hearing on 4/20/2020 at 08:30 AM before Judge David O. Carter. (Attachments: #1 Memorandum Memorandum of Points and Authorities in Support of Defendant U.S. Bank's Motion to Dismiss, #2 Declaration Declaration of Nicholas Petersen, #3 Declaration Declaration of Eric Anderson, #4 Proposed Order Granting Motion to Dismiss Complaint) (Attorney Nicholas D. K. Petersen added to party U.S. Bank, N.A.(pty:dft)) (Petersen, Nicholas)
February 20, 2020 Opinion or Order Filing 8 ORDER by Judge David O. Carter: Granting #4 APPLICATION for Pro Se Electronic Filing. The applicant must register to use the Courts CM/ECF System within five (5) days of being served with this order. Registration information is available at the Pro Se Litigant E-Filing web page located on the Courts website. Upon registering, the applicant will receive a CM/ECF login and password that will allow him/her to file non-sealed documents electronically in this case only. Any documents being submitted under seal must be manually filed with the Clerk. (twdb)
February 20, 2020 Opinion or Order Filing 7 INITIAL STANDING ORDER FOLLOWING ASSIGNMENT OF CIVIL CASE TO JUDGE CARTER upon filing of the complaint by Judge David O. Carter. (kd)
February 18, 2020 Filing 6 NOTICE TO PARTIES OF COURT-DIRECTED ADR PROGRAM filed. (et)
February 18, 2020 Filing 5 NOTICE OF ASSIGNMENT to District Judge David O. Carter and Magistrate Judge Karen E. Scott. (et)
February 18, 2020 Filing 4 APPLICATION for Pro Se Litigant to electronically file documents in a specific case filed by Plaintiff Frank D. Luer. (et)
February 18, 2020 Filing 3 CERTIFICATION AND NOTICE of Interested Parties filed by Plaintiff Frank D. Luer. (et)
February 18, 2020 Filing 2 21 DAY Summons Issued re Complaint - (Discovery) #1 as to Defendant U.S. Bank, N.A. (et)
February 18, 2020 Filing 1 COMPLAINT against Defendants Does, U.S. Bank, N.A. Case assigned to Judge David O. Carter for all further proceedings. Discovery referred to Magistrate Judge Karen E. Scott. (Filing fee $ 400 FEE PAID.) Jury Demanded., filed by Plaintiff Frank D. Luer. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet) (et)

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 this case: Frank D. Luer v. U.S. Bank, N.A. et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Frank D. Luer
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Frank D Luer
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Does 1 to 10, inclusive
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: U.S. Bank, N.A.
Represented By: Nicholas D K Petersen
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]

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.


Why Is My Information Online?