Poupak Barekat v. George Alexander, et al
| Poupak Barekat |
| Does 1-10, inclusive, George Alexander and Lillian Alexander |
| 8:2020cv00987 |
| May 28, 2020 |
| US District Court for the Central District of California |
| John A Kronstadt |
| Karen E Scott |
| Civil Rights: Americans with Disabilities - Other |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 12101 |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on July 22, 2020. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 13
(IN CHAMBERS) ORDER SETTING HEARING ON PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR DEFAULT JUDGMENT by Judge John A. Kronstadt: On July 20, 2020, default was entered against Defendants (Dkt. #12 ). The Court sets the hearing on the motion for default judgment for September 28, 2020 at 8:30 AM; the motion shall be served on Defendant and filed with the Court no later than August 24, 2020. THERE IS NO PDF DOCUMENT ASSOCIATED WITH THIS ENTRY. (cw) TEXT ONLY ENTRY
|
| Filing 12 DEFAULT BY CLERK F.R.Civ.P.55(a) as to Defendants George Alexander and Lillian Alexander, individually and as trustees of the Alexander Living Trust U.D.T. June 16, 1993. (jp) |
| Filing 11 REQUEST for Entry of Default against defendant George Alexander, Lillian Alexander filed by plaintiff Poupak Barekat. (Attachments: #1 Declaration Re: Entry of Default) (Manning, Joseph) |
| Filing 10 PROOF OF SERVICE Executed by Plaintiff Poupak Barekat, upon Defendant George Alexander served on 6/22/2020, answer due 7/13/2020. in compliance with California Code of Civil Procedure by personal service.Original Summons NOT returned. (Manning, Joseph) |
| Filing 9 PROOF OF SERVICE Executed by Plaintiff Poupak Barekat, upon Defendant Lillian Alexander served on 6/22/2020, answer due 7/13/2020. in compliance with California Code of Civil Procedure by personal service.Original Summons NOT returned. (Manning, Joseph) |
|
Filing 8
STANDING ORDERS FOR CIVIL CASES ASSIGNED TO JUDGE JOHN A. KRONSTADT upon filing of the complaint by Judge John A. Kronstadt. Please read each Order carefully as they differ in some respects from the Local Rules. Counsel are advised that the Court, at any time, may amend one or more of its Standing Orders. It is the responsibility of counsel to refer to this Court's Procedures and Schedules found on the website for the United States District Court, Central District of California (www.cacd.uscourts.gov) to obtain the operative order. The Court thanks the parties and their counsel for their anticipated cooperation in carrying out these requirements. (droj)
|
| Filing 7 21 DAY Summons issued re Complaint #1 as to defendants George Alexander, Lillian Alexander. (esa) |
| Filing 6 NOTICE TO PARTIES OF COURT-DIRECTED ADR PROGRAM filed. (esa) |
| Filing 5 NOTICE OF ASSIGNMENT to District Judge John A. Kronstadt and Magistrate Judge Karen E. Scott. (esa) |
| Filing 4 Request for Clerk to Issue Summons on Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening) #1 filed by plaintiff POUPAK BAREKAT, an individual,. (Manning, Joseph) |
| Filing 3 CIVIL COVER SHEET filed by Plaintiff POUPAK BAREKAT, an individual,. (Manning, Joseph) |
| Filing 2 Certification and NOTICE of Interested Parties filed by plaintiff POUPAK BAREKAT, an individual,, (Manning, Joseph) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT Receipt No: ACACDC-26603562 - Fee: $400, filed by plaintiff POUPAK BAREKAT, an individual,. (Attorney Joseph Richard Manning, Jr added to party POUPAK BAREKAT, an individual, (pty:pla))(Manning, Joseph) |
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.
