Haibo Zhao v. Kathy Baran et al
Haibo Zhao |
Kenneth T. Cuccinelli, William P. Barr, Kathy Baran and Chad F. Wolf |
8:2020cv01331 |
July 22, 2020 |
US District Court for the Central District of California |
David O Carter |
Autumn D Spaeth |
Other Immigration Actions |
28 U.S.C. ยง 1361 |
None |
Docket Report
This docket was last retrieved on September 17, 2020. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
Document Text |
---|
Filing 12 STIPULATION Extending Time to Answer the complaint as to Chad F. Wolf answer now due 10/26/2020; Kenneth T. Cuccinelli answer now due 10/26/2020; Kathy Baran answer now due 10/26/2020; William P. Barr answer now due 10/26/2020, re Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening), #1 filed by Defendant Chad F. Wolf; Kenneth T. Cuccinelli; Kathy Baran; William P. Barr.(Attorney Paul Bartholomew Green added to party Kathy Baran(pty:dft), Attorney Paul Bartholomew Green added to party William P. Barr(pty:dft), Attorney Paul Bartholomew Green added to party Kenneth T. Cuccinelli(pty:dft), Attorney Paul Bartholomew Green added to party Chad F. Wolf(pty:dft))(Green, Paul) |
Filing 11 NOTICE of Related Case(s) filed by Defendants Kathy Baran, William P. Barr, Kenneth T. Cuccinelli, Chad F. Wolf. Related Case(s): CV 20-6360 RGK (PLA); CV 20-6361 SVW (JEMx); CV 20-6494 DDP (PDx); CV SA 20-1331 DOC (ADSx) (Green, Paul) |
Filing 10 PROOF OF SERVICE Executed by Plaintiff Haibo Zhao, upon Defendant All Defendants. Service of the Summons and Complaint were executed upon the United States Attorneys Office by delivering a copy to C Torres. Executed upon the Attorney Generals Office of the United States by delivering a copy to Ealy Sase. Executed upon the officer agency or corporation by delivering a copy to CSC. Service was executed in compliance with Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Due diligence declaration NOT attached. Registered or certified mail return receipt attached. Original Summons NOT returned. (Attachments: #1 Cert. Mail Receipts, #2 Return Receipt_atty general, #3 Return Receipt_civil process clerk, #4 Return Receipt_csc)(Lau, Linda) |
Filing 9 INITIAL STANDING ORDER FOLLOWING ASSIGNMENT OF CIVIL CASE TO JUDGE CARTER. (kd) |
Filing 8 60 DAY Summons Issued re Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening), #1 as to Defendants Kathy Baran, William P. Barr, Kenneth T. Cuccinelli, Chad F. Wolf. (car) |
Filing 7 NOTICE TO PARTIES OF COURT-DIRECTED ADR PROGRAM filed. (car) |
Filing 6 NOTICE OF ASSIGNMENT to District Judge David O. Carter and Magistrate Judge Autumn D. Spaeth. (car) |
Filing 5 NOTICE RE INTRA-DISTRICT TRANSFER by Clerk of Court due to incorrect intra-district venue selected by the filer. Case is transferred to the Southern Division. Case has been assigned to Judge David O. Carter for all further proceedings. Any matters that may be referred to a Magistrate Judge are assigned to Autumn D. Spaeth. New Case Number 8:20-cv-01331-DOC-ADSx. (car) |
Filing 4 CIVIL COVER SHEET filed by Plaintiff Haibo Zhao. (Lau, Linda) |
Filing 3 NOTICE of Interested Parties filed by Plaintiff Haibo Zhao, (Lau, Linda) |
Filing 2 Request for Clerk to Issue Summons on Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening), #1 filed by Plaintiff Haibo Zhao. (Lau, Linda) |
Filing 1 COMPLAINT Receipt No: ACACDC-27318406 - Fee: $400, filed by Plaintiff Haibo Zhao. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit 1, #2 Exhibit 2, #3 Exhibit 3, #4 Exhibit 4, #5 Exhibit 5, #6 Exhibit 6, #7 Exhibit 7, #8 Exhibit 8, #9 Exhibit 9) (Attorney Linda Wong Lau added to party Haibo Zhao(pty:pla))(Lau, Linda) |
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.