Madelaine Esquibel v. Walgreen Co. et al
| Madelaine Esquibel |
| Walgreen Co. and Does 1-10, inclusive |
| 8:2021cv01185 |
| July 9, 2021 |
| US District Court for the Central District of California |
| David O Carter |
| John D Early |
| Civil Rights: Jobs |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1441 |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on October 14, 2021. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 13 TEXT ONLY ENTRY by Judge David O. Carter. The Court advances the in-person Scheduling Conference to SEPTEMBER 9, 2021, at 4:30 PM. IT IS SO ORDERED. THERE IS NO PDF DOCUMENT ASSOCIATED WITH THIS ENTRY. (kd) TEXT ONLY ENTRY |
| Filing 12 JOINT REPORT of Rule 26(f) Discovery Plan filed by Plaintiff Madelaine Esquibel. (King, Julian) |
Filing 11
ORDER SETTING SCHEDULING CONFERENCE by Judge David O. Carter. Scheduling Conference set for 9/13/2021 at 08:30 AM before Judge David O. Carter. (kd)
|
| Filing 10 INITIAL STANDING ORDER FOLLOWING ASSIGNMENT OF CIVIL CASE TO JUDGE CARTER. (kd) |
| Filing 9 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE filed by defendant Walgreen Co., re Certificate/Notice of Interested Parties #3 , Notice to Parties of Court-Directed ADR Program (ADR-8) - optional html form #6 , Returning Case for Reassignment w/i division (CV-89), #8 , Notice of Related Case(s) #4 , Notice of Removal (Attorney Civil Case Opening),, #1 , Notice to Counsel Re: Consent to Proceed before a US Magistrate Judge - optional html form #7 , Civil Cover Sheet (CV-71) #2 , Notice of Assignment to United States Judges(CV-18) - optional html form #5 served on July 14, 2021. (Helmer, Leslie) |
|
Filing 8
ORDER RETURNING CASE FOR REASSIGNMENT by Judge James V. Selna. ORDER case returned to the Clerk for random reassignment pursuant to General Order 21-01. Case randomly reassigned from Judge James V. Selna to Judge David O. Carter for all further proceedings. The case number will now reflect the initials of the transferee Judge 8:21-cv-01185-DOC(JDEx). (dta)
|
| Filing 7 Notice to Counsel Re Consent to Proceed Before a United States Magistrate Judge. (car) |
| Filing 6 NOTICE TO PARTIES OF COURT-DIRECTED ADR PROGRAM filed. (car) |
| Filing 5 NOTICE OF ASSIGNMENT to District Judge James V. Selna and Magistrate Judge John D. Early. (car) |
| NON-CONFORMED COPY OF ANSWER to Complaint - (Discovery) filed by Defendant Walgreen Co. Submitted with Attachment 2 to Notice of Removal #1 .(car) |
| CONFORMED COPY OF COMPLAINT against Defendants Does 1-10, inclusive, Walgreen Co. Jury Demanded, filed by Plaintiff Madelaine Esquibel. Filed in State Court on 7/9/21 Submitted with Attachment 1 to Notice of Removal #1 (car) |
| Filing 4 NOTICE of Related Case(s) filed by defendant Walgreen Co.. (Helmer, Leslie) |
| Filing 3 CERTIFICATE of Interested Parties filed by Defendant All Defendants, identifying Walgreens Boots Alliance, Inc.. (Helmer, Leslie) |
| Filing 2 CIVIL COVER SHEET filed by Defendant Walgreen Co.. (Helmer, Leslie) |
| Filing 1 NOTICE OF REMOVAL from Orange County Superior Court, case number 30-2021-01204683-CU-WT-CJC Receipt No: ACACDC-31603689 - Fee: $402, filed by defendant Walgreen Co.. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit 1 - Summons and Complaint, #2 Exhibit 2 - Answer to Complaint, #3 Exhibit 3 - Notice of Service of Process, #4 Exhibit 4 - Declaration of Alicia Musgrove, #5 Exhibit 5 - Declaration of Joseph B. Amsbary, Jr., #6 Exhibit 6 - Notice to Adverse Parties and Superior Court) (Attorney Leslie Hecht Helmer added to party Walgreen Co.(pty:dft))(Helmer, Leslie) |
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.
