LA Tech and Consulting v. American Express National Bank et al
Plaintiff: LA Tech and Consulting
Defendant: American Express National Bank and Does 1 to 50, inclusive
Case Number: 8:2022cv01213
Filed: June 24, 2022
Court: US District Court for the Central District of California
Presiding Judge: David O Carter
Referring Judge: Karen E Scott
Nature of Suit: Other Fraud
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 1441 Notice of Removal - Fraud
Jury Demanded By: Plaintiff
Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on June 10, 2024. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
June 24, 2022 Filing 6 Notice to Counsel Re Consent to Proceed Before a United States Magistrate Judge. (ghap)
June 24, 2022 Filing 5 NOTICE TO PARTIES OF COURT-DIRECTED ADR PROGRAM filed. (ghap)
June 24, 2022 Filing 4 NOTICE OF ASSIGNMENT to District Judge David O. Carter and Magistrate Judge Karen E. Scott. (ghap)
June 24, 2022 Filing 3 CERTIFICATION AND NOTICE of Interested Parties filed by Defendant American Express Company, Inc., identifying Corporate Parent American Express Company. (Frontino, Brian)
June 24, 2022 Filing 2 CIVIL COVER SHEET filed by Defendant American Express Company, Inc.. (Frontino, Brian)
June 24, 2022 Filing 1 NOTICE OF REMOVAL from Orange County Superior Court, case number 30-2022-01260599-CU-NP-CJC Receipt No: ACACDC-33525204 - Fee: $402, filed by Defendant American Express Company, Inc.. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A - State Court Complaint) (Attorney Brian C Frontino added to party American Express Company, Inc.(pty:dft))(Frontino, Brian)
June 24, 2022 CONFORMED FILED COPY OF PROOF OF SERVICE Executed by Plaintiff LA Tech and Consulting, upon Defendant American Express National Bank served on 5/26/2022, answer due 6/16/2022. Service of the Summons and Complaint were executed upon Daisy Montenegro - CT Process Specialist in compliance with California Code of Civil Procedure by personal service.Original Summons NOT returned. (FILED IN STATE COURT ON 5/31/2022 SUBMITTED ATTACHED EXHIBIT A) (ghap)
June 24, 2022 CONFORMED FILED COPY OF COMPLAINT against Defendants LA Tech and Consulting. Jury Demanded., filed by plaintiff LA Tech and Consulting. (FILED IN STATE COURT ON 5/19/2022 SUBMITTED ATTACHED EXHIBIT A) (ghap)

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: LA Tech and Consulting v. American Express National Bank 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: LA Tech and Consulting
Represented By: James David Daily
Represented By: Michael Robert Jones
Represented By: Scott James Kalter
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: American Express National Bank
Represented By: Brian C Frontino
Represented By: Christopher R Fredrich
Represented By: Rebecca Mandel
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 50, 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 ]

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?