O'Campo v. Chico Mall, LP et al
| Dimas O'Campo |
| Chico Mall, LP, General Growth Properties, Inc., Pacific Sunwear Corp., The Buckle, Inc., BRHumble, LLC, The Gap, Inc., Hot Topic, Inc., Kim Inouye, J. C. Penney Company, Inc. and Sbarro, Inc. |
| 2:2010cv01105 |
| May 5, 2010 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of California |
| Sacramento Office |
| Sacramento |
| Lawrence K. Karlton |
| Americans with Disabilities - Other |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 12101 |
| None |
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
70
STIPULATION AND ORDER signed by Senior Judge Lawrence K. Karlton on 4/13/11 ORDERING that Plaintiff's Complaint is DISMISSED with prejudice. CASE CLOSED. (Mena-Sanchez, L)
|
|
Filing
67
ORDER signed by Senior Judge Lawrence K. Karlton on 3/28/11 ORDERING that the dispositional documents disposing of the case shall be filed no later than forty-five days from the effective date of this order. All hearing dates set in this matter are VACATED.(Mena-Sanchez, L)
|
|
Filing
65
STIPULATION and ORDER signed by Senior Judge Lawrence K. Karlton on 01/25/11 ORDERING J. C. Penney Company, Inc DISMISSED with Prejudice. (Williams, D)
|
|
Filing
63
STIPULATION and ORDER signed by Senior Judge Lawrence K. Karlton on 12/10/10: Defendant Pacific Sunwear Corp. DISMISSED with prejudice. (Kaminski, H)
|
|
Filing
60
ORDER signed by Senior Judge Lawrence K. Karlton on 10/26/2010 DENYING defendant Hot Topic's 43 Motion for Summary Judgment without prejudice. Defendant may again move for Summary Judgment at close of Discovery. Plaintiff's 54 Application for Rule 56(f) continuance is DENIED as moot. (Marciel, M)
|
|
Filing
51
ORDER signed by Senior Judge Lawrence K. Karlton on 9/1/10: Plaintiff may file an amended complaint within seven (7) days of the issuance of this order. Plaintiff shall file a new declaration as to standing that conforms with E.D. Cal. Local Rules wi thin seven (7) days of the issuance of this order. If defendant Hot Topic, Inc. wishes to amend its motion for summary judgment in light of this order, it must inform the court within seven (7) days of the issuance of this order of its intention to do so. (Kaminski, H)
|
|
Filing
42
ORDER signed by Senior Judge Lawrence K. Karlton on 8/12/10: Defendant Hot Topic's application for a stay and an early evaluation conference 15 and motion to dismiss 19 are DENIED. The court FURTHER ORDERS plaintiff to SHOW CAUSE as to whether he has standing to challenge the legality of the barriers identified in his complaint. (Kaminski, H)
|
|
Filing
33
ORDER signed by Senior Judge Lawrence K. Karlton on 07/13/10 ORDERING that dft's 32 Motion for Extension of Time is GRANTED; dft may file a reply brief re Motion to Stay by 07/14/10. (Benson, A.)
|
|
Filing
31
STIPULATION and ORDER signed by Senior Judge Lawrence K. Karlton on 7/12/10 ORDERING THAT Defendants Chico Mall, LP, General Growth Properties, Inc., Sbarro, Inc., and The Buckle shall have up to and including Monday, August 9,2010 by which to file their respective responsive pleadings to Plaintiff's Complaint.(Becknal, R)
|
|
Filing
23
ORDER signed by Senior Judge Lawrence K. Karlton on 7/1/10: HEARING as to 15 MOTION to Stay set for 8/9/2010 at 10:00 AM in Courtroom 4 (LKK) before Senior Judge Lawrence K. Karlton. Defendant Hot Topic, Inc. may file an reply brief on or before July 12, 2010. (Kaminski, H)
|
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.
