Ticad Retail Properties Holdings LLC v. H&R Block Tax Services et al
| Ticad Retail Properties Holdings, LLC |
| H&R Block Enterprises, LLC a Missouri limited liability company doing business as H&R Block Tax Services and Does 1 through 20, inclusive |
| 8:2022cv01725 |
| September 20, 2022 |
| US District Court for the Central District of California |
| John W Holcomb |
| Karen E Scott |
| Rent Lease & Ejectment |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on October 19, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 13
ORDER SETTING SCHEDULING CONFERENCE by Judge John W. Holcomb. Scheduling Conference set for 12/2/2022 at 11:00 AM before Judge John W. Holcomb. (dgo)
|
|
Filing 12
ORDER GRANTING APPLICATION of Non-Resident Attorney Stephen M. Bledsoe to Appear Pro Hac Vice on behalf of Defendant H&R Block Enterprises, LLC by Judge John W. Holcomb. THERE IS NO PDF DOCUMENT ASSOCIATED WITH THIS ENTRY. (eva) TEXT ONLY ENTRY
|
| Filing 11 NOTICE of Deficiency in Electronically Filed Pro Hac Vice Application RE: APPLICATION of Non-Resident Attorney Stephen M. Bledsoe to Appear Pro Hac Vice on behalf of Defendant H&R Block Enterprises, LLC (Pro Hac Vice Fee - $500 Fee Paid, Receipt No. ACACDC-34060808) #10 . The following error(s) was/were found: Local Rule 83-2.1.3.3(a) Application not complete: state and/or federal courts to which the applicant has been admitted are not listed. Other error(s) with document(s): Failed to list state bars where attorney is licensed. (lt) |
| Filing 10 APPLICATION of Non-Resident Attorney Stephen M. Bledsoe to Appear Pro Hac Vice on behalf of Defendant H&R Block Enterprises, LLC (Pro Hac Vice Fee - $500 Fee Paid, Receipt No. ACACDC-34060808) filed by Defendant H&R Block Enterprises, LLC. (Attachments: #1 Proposed Order, #2 Proof of Service) (Attorney Brodie Hugh Smith added to party H&R Block Enterprises, LLC(pty:dft)) (Smith, Brodie) |
|
Filing 9
STANDING ORDER by Judge John W. Holcomb. (dgo)
|
| Filing 8 PROOF OF SERVICE filed by Defendant H&R Block Enterprises, LLC, re Certificate/Notice of Interested Parties #2 , Notice of Removal (Attorney Civil Case Opening), #1 , Answer to Complaint #3 served on September 21, 2022. (Lanza, Anthony) |
| Filing 7 Notice to Counsel Re Consent to Proceed Before a United States Magistrate Judge. (sh) |
| Filing 6 NOTICE TO PARTIES OF COURT-DIRECTED ADR PROGRAM filed. (sh) |
| Filing 5 NOTICE OF ASSIGNMENT to District Judge John W. Holcomb and Magistrate Judge Karen E. Scott. (sh) |
| Filing 4 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 John W. Holcomb for all further proceedings. Any matters that may be referred to a Magistrate Judge are assigned to Karen E. Scott. New Case Number 8:22-cv-01725 JWH (KSx). (sh) |
| CONFORMED E-FILED COPY OF SUMMONS AND COMPLAINT against Defendants Does, H&R Block Enterprises, LLC., filed by Plaintiff Ticad Retail Properties Holdings, LLC.[FILED IN STATE COURT 08/17/2022 SUBMITTED AS ATTACHMENT NO. 1 EXHIBIT 1 TO THE NOTICE OF REMOVAL #1 ] (sh) |
| Filing 3 ANSWER to Notice of Removal (Attorney Civil Case Opening), #1 PLAINTIFF'S COMPLAINT (Exhibit 1 to Notice of Removal) filed by Defendant H&R BLOCK ENTERPRISES, LLC dba H&R BLOCK TAX SERVICES.(Lanza, Anthony) |
| Filing 2 CERTIFICATE of Interested Parties filed by Defendant H&R BLOCK ENTERPRISES, LLC dba H&R BLOCK TAX SERVICES, identifying H&R BLOCK, INC. and BlackRock, Inc.. (Attachments: #1 CIVIL COVER SHEET)(Lanza, Anthony) |
| Filing 1 NOTICE OF REMOVAL from Orange County Superior Court, case number 30-2022-01275974-CU-BC-CJC Receipt No: ACACDC-34018669 - Fee: $402, filed by Defendant H&R BLOCK ENTERPRISES, LLC dba H&R BLOCK TAX SERVICES. (Attorney Anthony L Lanza added to party H&R BLOCK ENTERPRISES, LLC dba H&R BLOCK TAX SERVICES(pty:dft))(Lanza, Anthony) |
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
| Search for this case: Ticad Retail Properties Holdings LLC v. H&R Block Tax Services 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: Ticad Retail Properties Holdings, LLC | |
| Represented By: | Walter Pena |
| 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: H&R Block Enterprises, LLC a Missouri limited liability company doing business as H&R Block Tax Services | |
| Represented By: | Anthony L Lanza |
| Represented By: | Brodie Hugh Smith |
| Represented By: | Stephen M. Bledsoe |
| Represented By: | Anthony L. Lanza |
| 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 through 20, 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.
