Lateef v. City of Madera et al
| Junaid Lateef |
| City of Madera, Madera City Council and Madera Planning Commission |
| 1:2016cv01488 |
| October 5, 2016 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of California |
| Fresno Office |
| Madera |
| Dale A. Drozd |
| Sheila K. Oberto |
| Other Civil Rights |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1983 |
| Plaintiff |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
53
ORDER DISMISSING CASE pursuant to FRCP 41(a)(1)(A)(ii),signed by Magistrate Judge Sheila K. Oberto on 2/21/2020. CASE CLOSED, 52 (Martin-Gill, S)
|
|
Filing
31
ORDER GRANTING the parties' request to stay the case, document 28 , pending resolution of a related case, Case No. MCV 072672 in Madera County Superior Court. Order signed by Magistrate Judge Sheila K. Oberto on 5/22/2017. (Rooney, M)
|
|
Filing
26
ORDER REASSIGNING CASE signed by District Judge Dale A. Drozd on 4/28/17. New Case Number: 1:16-cv-01488-SKO.(Marrujo, C)
|
|
Filing
20
ORDER Granting Defendants' 15 Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff's First Amended Complaint, signed by District Judge Dale A. Drozd on 3/21/2017. (This matter is referred to the assigned magistrate judge for further proceedings consistent with this order.) (Gaumnitz, R)
|
|
Filing
12
ORDER Granting in Part Defendants' 5 Motion to Dismiss With Leave to Amend, signed by District Judge Dale A. Drozd on 12/13/2016. (Gaumnitz, R)
|
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 Eastern 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.
