Yeong Lee v. Mohammed Abdelnaby et al
| Yeong Lee |
| Mohammed Abdelnaby and Does 1 to 10 |
| 8:2020cv02409 |
| December 22, 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
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on December 29, 2020. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 9
ORDER re: PROSECUTION OF CERTAIN CASES UNDER THE AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT upon filing of the complaint by Judge David O. Carter. (kd)
|
| Filing 8 INITIAL STANDING ORDER FOLLOWING ASSIGNMENT OF CIVIL CASE TO JUDGE CARTER. (kd) |
| Filing 7 21 DAY Summons Issued re Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening) #1 as to Defendant Mohammed Abdelnaby. (lh) |
| Filing 6 NOTICE TO PARTIES OF COURT-DIRECTED ADR PROGRAM filed. (lh) |
| Filing 5 NOTICE OF ASSIGNMENT to District Judge David O. Carter and Magistrate Judge Autumn D. Spaeth. (lh) |
| Filing 4 Request for Clerk to Issue Summons on Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening) #1 YEONG LEE. (Kim, Jason) |
| Filing 3 CERTIFICATE of Interested Parties (Kim, Jason) |
| Filing 2 CIVIL COVER SHEET filed by Plaintiff YEONG LEE. (Kim, Jason) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT Receipt No: BCACDC-29660995 - Fee: $402. (Attorney Jason J Kim added to party YEONG LEE(pty:pla))(Kim, Jason) |
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.
