Gill et al v. Vaillancourt et al
Gills Auto Sales and Gurmukh Singh Gill |
Michelle Webb, Scott Vaillancourt and Scott Greminger |
2:2013cv01114 |
June 4, 2013 |
US District Court for the Eastern District of California |
Sacramento Office |
Sacramento |
Edmund F. Brennan |
Morrison C. England |
Civil Rights: Other |
42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 Civil Rights Act |
Plaintiff |
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
Document Text |
---|
Filing 24 ORDER signed by Chief Judge Morrison C. England, Jr on 3/10/14 ORDERING that this action is now DISMISSED with prejudice, and the Clerk is directed to close this case. (Mena-Sanchez, L) |
Filing 23 MEMORANDUM and ORDER signed by Chief Judge Morrison C. England, Jr on 1/13/14 ORDERING for the reasons just stated, Defendants' Motion to Dismiss 16 isGRANTED with leave to amend. Not later than thirty (30) days following the date this Memoran dum and Order is electronically filed, Plaintiffs may (but are not required to) file an amended complaint. If no amended complaint is filed within said thirty (30)-day period, without further notice to the parties, the causes of action dismissed by virtue of this Memorandum and Order will be dismissed with prejudice. (Becknal, R) |
Filing 12 ORDER signed by Chief Judge Morrison C. England, Jr. on 8/2/2013 GRANTING 9 Motion for Extension of Time; ORDERING Defendants to respond to Plaintiff's complaint by 9/5/2013. (Michel, G) |
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.