Block v. Big 5 Corp., et al.
Plaintiff: Hendrik Block
Defendant: Big 5 Corp. Doing business as Big 5 Sporting Goods #443 and Oak Equity Group LLC
Case Number: 1:2022cv01104
Filed: August 31, 2022
Court: US District Court for the Eastern District of California
Presiding Judge: Ana de Alba
Referring Judge: Barbara A McAuliffe
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights: Americans with Disabilities - Other
Cause of Action: 42 U.S.C. ยง 12101 Americans with Disabilities Act
Jury Demanded By: None
Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on October 18, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
October 18, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 7 MINUTE ORDER (TEXT Only): The parties shall appear at the SCHEDULING CONFERENCE currently set for November 29, 2022, at 9:30 AM in Courtroom 8 (BAM) before Magistrate Judge Barbara A. McAuliffe with each party connecting remotely either via Zoom video conference or Zoom telephone number. The parties shall be provided with the Zoom ID and password by the Courtroom Deputy prior to the conference. The Zoom ID number and password are confidential and are not to be shared. Appropriate court attire required. Minute order signed by Magistrate Judge Barbara A. McAuliffe on 10/18/2022. (Valdez, E)
October 6, 2022 Filing 6 SUMMONS RETURNED EXECUTED: Oak Equity Group LLC served on 10/6/2022, answer due 10/27/2022. (Moore, Tanya)
October 3, 2022 Filing 5 STIPULATION to Extend Time to Respond to Complaint by Big 5 Corp.. Attorney Reeves, Rex added. (Reeves, Rex)
September 28, 2022 Filing 4 SUMMONS RETURNED EXECUTED: Big 5 Corp. served on 9/19/2022, answer due 10/11/2022. (Moore, Tanya)
August 31, 2022 Filing 3 CIVIL NEW CASE DOCUMENTS ISSUED; Initial Scheduling Conference set for 11/29/2022 at 09:30 AM in Courtroom 8 (BAM) before Magistrate Judge Barbara A. McAuliffe. (Attachments: #1 Standing Order, #2 Consent Form, #3 VDRP) (Lundstrom, T)
August 31, 2022 Filing 2 SUMMONS ISSUED as to *Big 5 Corp., Oak Equity Group LLC* with answer to complaint due within *21* days. Attorney *Tanya E. Moore* *Moore Law Firm, P.C.* *300 South First St., Suite 342* *San Jose, CA 95113*. (Lundstrom, T)
August 31, 2022 Filing 1 COMPLAINT Asserting Denial of Right of Access Under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) against All Defendants by Hendrik Block. Attorney Moore, Tanya E. added. (Filing fee $ 402, receipt number ACAEDC-10416319) (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet)(Moore, Tanya)

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 Eastern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Block v. Big 5 Corp., 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: Hendrik Block
Represented By: Tanya E. Moore
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: Big 5 Corp. Doing business as Big 5 Sporting Goods #443
Represented By: Rex Reeves
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: Oak Equity Group LLC
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?