Soto v. Graybar Electric Company, Inc., et al.
Plaintiff: John Soto
Defendant: Graybar Electric Company, Inc. and Ernesto Acosta
Case Number: 1:2024cv00520
Filed: May 1, 2024
Court: US District Court for the Eastern District of California
Presiding Judge: Sheila K Oberto
Referring Judge: Jennifer L Thurston
Nature of Suit: Labor: Other
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 1441 Petition for Removal- Labor/Mgmnt. Relations
Jury Demanded By: Plaintiff
Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on June 24, 2024. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
June 24, 2024 Filing 14 REPLY by John Soto to RESPONSE to #6 Motion to Remand,. (Bakstad, Paal)
June 14, 2024 Filing 13 OPPOSITION by Graybar Electric Company, Inc. to #6 Motion to Remand,. (Attachments: #1 Declaration of Sara Lamkey in support of Defendant Graybar Electric Company, Inc.'s Opposition to Plaintiff John Soto's Motion for Order Remanding Action to State Court, #2 Request for Judicial Notice in support of Defendant Graybar Electric Company, Inc.'s Opposition to Plaintiff John Soto's Motion for Order Remanding Action to State Court, #3 Defendant Graybar Electric Company, Inc.'s Response to Plaintiff's Evidentiary Objections to Evidence Submitted in support of Notice of Removal)(Sullivan, Kevin)
June 14, 2024 Opinion or Order Filing 12 MINUTE ORDER (Text Only Entry) signed by Magistrate Judge Sheila K. Oberto on 6/14/2024: In light of the pending motion(s), the Initial Scheduling Conference currently set for 8/8/2024, is CONTINUED to 3/18/2025, at 9:45 AM, before Magistrate Judge Sheila K. Oberto. The parties SHALL file their joint scheduling report 7 days prior to the conference. (Kusamura, W)
June 4, 2024 Opinion or Order Filing 11 MINUTE ORDER (Text Only Entry) Pursuant to Local Rule 302, the filed motion to remand #6 will be heard and decided by the undersigned. As set forth in the Court's standing order, no hearing will be calendared, and the matter will be decided on the papers. As a result of the ongoing judicial resource emergency in this District, approximately 100 regular civil motions remain under submission before the undersigned. As a result, it is likely to be six or more months until the motion(s) in this matter is resolved. The Court reiterates that magistrate judge consent can alleviate the delay caused by the resource emergency. The parties SHALL reconsider magistrate judge consent for all purposes or only for this pending motion. In addition, the parties are reminded of their ongoing obligation to inform the Court of any changed circumstances that have rendered all or part of any pending motion moot. Finally, the parties are informed that the undersigned generally requires a formal settlement conference take place before any civil case proceeds to trial. Should the parties jointly wish to schedule a settlement conference, they are directed to contact Courtroom Deputy Irma Munoz at imunoz@caed.uscourts.gov signed by District Judge Jennifer L. Thurston on June 4, 2024. (Munoz, I)
June 4, 2024 Opinion or Order Filing 10 STANDING ORDER signed by District Judge Jennifer L. Thurston on June 4, 2024. (Munoz, I)
June 3, 2024 Filing 9 CLERK'S NOTICE REASSIGNING CASE (TEXT ONLY). This case has been assigned to District Judge Jennifer L. Thurston and Magistrate Judge Sheila K. Oberto. The new case number is: 1:24-cv-00520-JLT-SKO. (Marrujo, C)
June 3, 2024 Opinion or Order Filing 8 MINUTE ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Sheila K. Oberto on 6/3/2024: (Text Only Entry) Pursuant to paragraph (m) of the Automated Case Assignment Plan, Appendix A to the Local Rules of the United States District Court, Eastern District of California, this case was randomly assigned directly to Magistrate Judge Sheila K. Oberto. (See Doc. #2 -1.) Without the written consent of all parties, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 636(c), a Magistrate Judge cannot conduct all proceedings and enter judgment in this case. (See id.) As there has been no written consent of all parties at this time, the hearing on Plaintiff's motion for remand set for July 10, 2024 (Doc. #6 ) is VACATED, to be re-set, if appropriate, before the to-be-assigned district judge. Accordingly, the Clerk of Court is DIRECTED to assign a district judge to this case. (Kusamura, W)
May 31, 2024 Filing 7 OBJECTIONS by Plaintiff John Soto. (Bakstad, Paal)
May 31, 2024 Filing 6 MOTION to REMAND Notice of Motion and Motion for Order Remanding Action to State Court; Memorandum of Points and Authorities by John Soto. Motion Hearing set for 7/10/2024 at 09:30 AM in Courtroom 7 (SKO) before Magistrate Judge Sheila K. Oberto. (Attachments: #1 Proposed Order Proposed order granting Plaintiff's Motion to remand action to state court)(Bakstad, Paal)
May 9, 2024 Opinion or Order Filing 5 ORDER GRANTING STIPULATION TO CONTINUE DEFENDANT'S RESPONSIVE PLEADING DEADLINE PENDING THE COURT'S RULING ON PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR REMAND. Order signed by Magistrate Judge Sheila K. Oberto on 5/8/2024. (Kusamura, W)
May 7, 2024 Filing 4 STIPULATION and PROPOSED ORDER for Continuance of Defendant Graybar Electric Company, Inc.'s Responsive Pleading Deadline Pending the Court's Ruling on Plaintiff's Motion for Remand by Graybar Electric Company, Inc.. (Attachments: #1 Proposed Order Granting Stipulation to Continue Defendant Graybar Electric Company, Inc.'s Responsive Pleading Deadline Pending the Court's Ruling on Plaintiff's Motion for Remand)(Sullivan, Kevin)
May 3, 2024 Filing 3 NOTICE of APPEARANCE by Paal Hjalmar Bakstad on behalf of John Soto. Attorney Bakstad, Paal Hjalmar added. (Bakstad, Paal)
May 2, 2024 Filing 2 CIVIL NEW CASE DOCUMENTS ISSUED: Initial Scheduling Conference set for 8/8/2024 at 09:30 AM in Courtroom 7 (SKO) before Magistrate Judge Sheila K. Oberto. (Attachments: #1 Appendix A(m), #2 Consent Form, #3 VDRP) (Rivera, O)
May 1, 2024 RECEIPT number ACAEDC-11500174 for $405.00 for Civil Filing Fee from Kevin Dennis Sullivan. (Lundstrom, T)
May 1, 2024 Filing 1 NOTICE of REMOVAL from Fresno County Superior Court, case number 24CECG01252 by John Soto. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit 1: Plaintiff's Class Action Complaint, #2 Civil Cover Sheet, #3 Declaration of Sarah Lamkey in support of Defendant Graybar Electric Company, Inc.'s Notice of Removal, #4 Request for Judicial Notice in support of Defendant Graybar Electric Company, Inc.'s Notice of Removal, #5 Defendant Graybar Electric Company, Inc.'s Corporate Disclosure Statement, #6 Certificate of Service)(Sullivan, Kevin)

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: Soto v. Graybar Electric Company, Inc., 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: John Soto
Represented By: David Daniel Bibiyan
Represented By: Jeffrey D. Klein
Represented By: Paal Hjalmar Bakstad
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: Graybar Electric Company, Inc.
Represented By: Kevin Dennis Sullivan
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: Ernesto Acosta
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?