Rusu-Carp v. Internal Revenue Service

Justia Dockets & Filings Ninth Circuit California Eastern District Rusu-Carp v. Internal Revenue Service

Rusu-Carp v. Internal Revenue Service

Plaintiff:	Lyubov Rusu-Carp
Defendant:	Internal Revenue Service
Case Number:	2:2011cv01135
Filed:	April 28, 2011
Court:	US District Court for the Eastern District of California
Office:	Sacramento Office
County:	Sacramento
Presiding Judge:	Kendall J. Newman
Presiding Judge:	Morrison C. England
Nature of Suit:	Customer Challenge
Cause of Action:	26 U.S.C. § 7401
Jury Demanded By:	None

Follow case documents by RSS

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed	Document Text
November 15, 2011	Filing 12 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 11/14/2011 GRANTING 5 Defendant's Motion to Dismiss. Plaintiff's complaint is DISMISSED without prejudice, and plaintiff is GRANTED leave to file an amend complaint. Plaintiff shall h ave 30 days from the date of entry of this order within which to file and serve an amended complaint entitled "First Amended Complaint." The Status Pretrial Scheduling Conference CONTINUED to 3/1/2012 at 10:00 AM in Courtroom 25 (KJN) before Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman. (Reader, L)
September 19, 2011	Filing 7 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 9/16/2011 ORDERING 5 Motion Hearing on motion to dismiss is CONTINUED to 10/27/2011 at 09:00 AM in Courtroom 25 (KJN) before Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman; pltf's Opposition or a statement of non-opposition due by 9/29/2011; dft may file a written reply by 10/20/2011; Status Pretrial Scheduling Conference reset for 12/1/2011 at 10:00 AM in Courtroom 25 (KJN) before Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman. (Reader, L)

Date Filed

Document Text

November 15, 2011

Filing 12 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 11/14/2011 GRANTING 5 Defendant's Motion to Dismiss. Plaintiff's complaint is DISMISSED without prejudice, and plaintiff is GRANTED leave to file an amend complaint. Plaintiff shall h ave 30 days from the date of entry of this order within which to file and serve an amended complaint entitled "First Amended Complaint." The Status Pretrial Scheduling Conference CONTINUED to 3/1/2012 at 10:00 AM in Courtroom 25 (KJN) before Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman. (Reader, L)

September 19, 2011

Filing 7 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 9/16/2011 ORDERING 5 Motion Hearing on motion to dismiss is CONTINUED to 10/27/2011 at 09:00 AM in Courtroom 25 (KJN) before Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman; pltf's Opposition or a statement of non-opposition due by 9/29/2011; dft may file a written reply by 10/20/2011; Status Pretrial Scheduling Conference reset for 12/1/2011 at 10:00 AM in Courtroom 25 (KJN) before Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman. (Reader, L)

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: Rusu-Carp v. Internal Revenue Service
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Plaintiff: Lyubov Rusu-Carp
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: Internal Revenue Service
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?