Kent v. California Department of Consumer Affairs et al
| John Kent |
| California Department of Consumer Affairs, California State License Board, Stuart Rind, Rick Villucci, Diana Roach, Stephen Takimoto, Carl Vega, Sue Payne, Sue Stirewalt, Kevin, J Z Kleiman, Thomas Ebling, Andrea Souza, Anita Sisneros, Jacquelyn Maes and Patricia Nelson |
| 2:2009cv02905 |
| October 19, 2009 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of California |
| Sacramento Office |
| Sacramento |
| Edmund F. Brennan |
| Frank C. Damrell |
| Plaintiff |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 Civil Rights Act |
| 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
79
ORDER signed by Judge Kimberly J. Mueller on 8/28/13 ORDERING that Henderson factors one, two, four and five weigh in favor of the sanction of dismissal with prejudice, and factor three does not favor dismissal. On balance, dismissal is justified and the appropriate court action. CASE CLOSED (Kastilahn, A)
|
|
Filing
78
ORDER signed by Judge Kimberly J. Mueller on 7/8/2013 VACATING the 7/11/2013 Final Pretrial Conference and the 8/19/2013 Trial. Within 14 days of the date of this order, plaintiff is DIRECTED to SHOW CAUSE why this case should not be dismissed for failure to prosecute and for failure to comply with the court's order. The Court requests the Attorney's General's Office to NOTIFY plaintiff by telephone that the final pretrial conference has been vacated. (Donati, J)
|
|
Filing
73
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 5/3/2012 DENYING 65 Motion for Sanctions; SANCTIONING Plaintiff in the amount of $100, payable to the moving defendants through their counsel within 45 days; ORDERING Plaintiff to file a St atement with the Court within 7 days of payment; DISCHARGING the 71 Order to Show Cause; DIRECTING the Clerk of Court to serve the 62 Status (Pretrial Scheduling) Order on Plaintiff by 5/7/2012; ORDERING Plaintiff to serve his initial disclosures pursuant to F.R.Cv.P. 26(a)(1) on the defendants who have appeared in the action by 5/21/2012. (Michel, G)
|
|
Filing
71
ORDER to SHOW CAUSE signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 4/30/2012 ORDERING The 5/3/2012 hearing on defendants motion for terminating sanctions is VACATED; On or before 5/11/2012, plaintiff shall show cause in writing why: Plaintiff failed to file an opposition or statement of non-opposition in regards to defendants' motion for terminating sanctions; Plaintiff's case should not be dismissed with prejudice pursuant to FRCP 41(b) and Local Rules 110 and 183(a), based on plaint iff's failure to prosecute his case and comply with the court's Local Rules; and Plaintiff should not be ordered to pay defendants $850 as reasonable expenses incurred by defendants in pursuing their discovery related motion; Plaintiff 's failure to file a response to this Order to Show Cause will be deemed to constitute plaintiff's consent to the granting of defendants' motion for terminating sanctions, and shall constitute an additional ground for the imposition of appropriate sanctions including a recommendation that plaintiff's case be involuntarily dismissed pursuant to FRCP 41(b) and Local Rules 110 and 183(a). (Reader, L)
|
|
Filing
61
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 2/2/12, ORDERING that plaintiff is sanctioned in amount of $100, payable to the Clerk of Court. However, the undersigned notes that it appears that plaintiff paid the sanction on 2/2/12. On or before 2/17/12, plaintiff shall file a Notice of Current Contact Information, which provides plaintiff's current mailing address and valid phone number. (Kastilahn, A)
|
|
Filing
55
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 12/29/11 ORDERING Status (Pretrial Scheduling) Conference set for 2/2/2012 at 10:00 AM in Courtroom 25 (KJN) before Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman. The parties who have thus far appeared in th is action shall file status reports, or a joint status report if possible, on or before 1/19/12. Service of plaintiffs 53 Tenth Amended Complaint is appropriate as to defendants Jacquelyn Maes, Stuart Rind, and Andrea Souza. The Clerk of the Court is DIRECTED to issue forthwith all process pursuant to FRCP 4. The Clerk of Court shall send plaintiff 3 USM-285 forms, 1 summons, an endorsed copy of plaintiffs Tenth Amended Complaint, this courts scheduling order, and the forms providing notice o f the magistrate judges availability to exercise jurisdiction for all purposes. Within 30 days from the entry of this order, plaintiff shall supply theU.S. Marshal with all information needed by the Marshal to effectuate service of process, and shall , within 14 days thereafter, file a statement with the court that such documents have been submitted to the U.S. Marshal. The U.S. Marshal shall serve process, with copies of this courts scheduling order and related documents, within 90 days of receipt of the required information from plaintiff, without prepayment of costs. The United States Marshal shall, within 14 days thereafter, file a statement with the court that such documents have been served. (cc: USM)(Meuleman, A)
|
|
Filing
50
ORDER AND ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 10/20/11 ORDERING 49 Motion for Extension is granted; Plaintiff shall file his Tenth Amended Complaint no later than 11/10/11; On or before November 10, 2011, plaintiff&# 039;s newly acquired counsel shall file a separate notice of appearance with the court if he or she intends to represent plaintiff in these proceedings; and On or before November 10, 2011, plaintiff, or plaintiff's counsel on behalf of plaintiff, shall show cause in writing why: (a) plaintiff's in forma pauperis status should not be revoked, and (b) why plaintiff should not be required to pay the required $350 filing fee. (Matson, R) Modified on 10/21/2011 (Matson, R).
|
|
Filing
48
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 09/28/11 ORDERING that w/i 21 days, plf shall file a further amended pleading entitled "Tenth Amended Complaint", which attempts to cure the pleading deficiencies in plf's third and sixth claims for relief and re-alleges plf's eighth and ninth claims for relief as provided in the 42 Findings and Recommendation; after plf files his Tenth Amended Complaint, the undersigned will screen that further amended pleading and determine appropriate service; if plf fails to timely file his Tenth Amended Complaint, the undersigned will recommend the dismissal of this case. (Benson, A.)
|
|
Filing
47
ORDER signed by Judge Kimberly J. Mueller on 9/26/11 ADOPTING except with respect to plaintiff's third claim for relief 42 Findings and Recommendations; GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART 28 Motion to Dismiss; Plaintiff's first, secon d, fourth, fifth and seventh claims for relief are DISMISSED with prejudice; Plaintiff's third and sixth claims for relief are DISMISSED without prejudice; Plaintiff shall incorporate the claims he believes are not time-barred in any amendment o f his third claim for relief, based on the information presented in his objections. Plaintiff is GRANTED leave to file a tenth amended complaint that attempts to cure the pleading deficiencies in plaintiff's third and sixth claims for relief an d re-alleges plaintiff's eight and ninth claims for relief as provided in the magistrate judge's findings and recommendations. This matter is REFERRED back to magistrate judge for entry of any order that judge deems appropriate addressing the nature and timing of the further amended complaint tobe filed by plaintiff. (Meuleman, A)
|
|
Filing
42
FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 6/24/11 recommending that the motion to dismiss plaintiff's Ninth Amended Complaint filed by defendants Kevin Carr, Thomas Ebling, Jim Kleiman, Rick Lopez, Patricia Nel son, Sue Payne, Diana Roach, Anita Sisneros, Sue Stirewalt, Stephen Takimoto, Carl Vega, Rick Villucci, and Leslie Yocum-Howell (Dkt. No. 28) be granted in part and denied in part; Plaintiff's first, second, third, fourth, fifth, and seventh cla ims for relief alleged against defendants Carr, Ebling, Kleiman, Lopez, Nelson, Payne, Roach, Sisneros, Stirewalt, Takimoto, Vega, Villucci, and Yocum-Howell be dismissed with prejudice. Plaintiff's sixth claim for relief be dismissed without pr ejudice. Plaintiff be granted leave to file a tenth amended complaint that attempts to cure the pleading deficiencies in plaintiff's sixth claim for relief and re-alleges plaintiff's eighth and ninth claims for relief with accompanying docu mentation. It Is FURTHER ORDERED that the plaintiff show cause in writing no later than 7/8/11, why his claims against defendants Maes, Rind, and Souza should not be dismissed with prejudice. Objections to the F&R due w/in 14 days after being served. (Matson, R)
|
|
Filing
29
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 1/4/11 ORDERING that the hrg on Defendants' motion to dismiss 28 , set for 1/13/11, is continued until 2/17/11; Plaintiff shall file a written opposition to the motion to dismiss, or a statement of non-opposition thereto, on or before 1/20/11. (Becknal, R)
|
|
Filing
21
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 7/21/2010 ORDERING service is appropriate as to defendants Thomas Ebling, Kevin Kerr, Jim Kleiman, RickLopez, Jacquelyn Maes, Patricia Nelson, Sue Payne, Stuart Rind, Diana Roach, Anita Sisneros, Andrea Souza, Sue Stirewalt, Stephen Takimoto, Carl Vega, Rick Villucci, and Leslie Yoakum. The clerk shall send plaintiff 16 USM-285 forms, one summons, an endorsed copy of plaintiff's Ninth Amended Complaint, this court's scheduling order, and the forms providing notice of the magistrate judge's availability to exercise jurisdiction.(Matson, R)
|
|
Filing
20
ORDER signed by Judge Frank C. Damrell, Jr. on 7/19/2010 ORDERING 17 The Proposed Findings and Recommendations, are ADOPTED; Plaintiff's claims alleged against the CA Dept of Consumer Affairs and the Contractors State Licensing Board are DISMI SSED with prejudice and these dfts are DISMISSED from this action; Pltf's claims alleged against the remaining individual dfts are DISMISSED with prejudice to the extent that pltf has alleged such claims against these individuals in their official capacities; and pltf's tenth and eleventh claims for relief brought pursuant to 42:1985 and 1986, respectively, are DISMISSED with prejudice as to all defendants. (Reader, L)
|
|
Filing
17
ORDER and FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 6/10/2010 ORDERING Pltfs 3 Motion to Proceed IFP is GRANTED, but service of Pltfs' Ninth Amended Complaint will be directed by a separate order. IT IS FURTH ER RECOMMENDED that Pltf's claims alleged against the CA Dept of Consumer Affairs and the Contractors State Licensing Board be dismissed with prejudice. All of Pltfs' claims alleged against the remaining individual Dfts be dismissed with pr ejudice. Plaintiffs tenth and eleventh claims for relief brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §§ 1985 and 1986, respectively, be dismissed with prejudice as to all Dfts. Referred to Judge Frank C. Damrell, Jr.. Objections to F&R due within 14 days. (Engbretson, K.)
|
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.
