Rolling v. State of California Department of Industrial Relations, Division of Labor Standards Enforcement

Justia Dockets & Filings Ninth Circuit California Eastern District Rolling v. State of California Department of Industrial Relations, Division of Labor Standards Enforcement

Rolling v. State of California Department of Industrial Relations, Division of Labor Standards Enforcement

Plaintiff:	Emma J. Rolling
Defendant:	State of California Department of Industrial Relations, Division of Labor Standards Enforcement
Case Number:	2:2013cv01121
Filed:	June 5, 2013
Court:	US District Court for the Eastern District of California
Office:	Sacramento Office
County:	Sacramento
Presiding Judge:	John A. Mendez
Presiding Judge:	Kendall J. Newman
Nature of Suit:	Employment
Cause of Action:	28 U.S.C. § 1441
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
July 22, 2013	Filing 17 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 7/19/2013 GRANTING 9 defendant's motion to dismiss; plaintiff's complaint is DISMISSED with LEAVE TO AMEND; Plaintiff shall file any amended complaint in accordance with this order wit hin 30 days. Alternatively, plaintiff may file a notice of voluntary dismissal of her claims without prejudice pursuant to FRCP 41(a)(1)(A)(i) within 30 days. Defendant shall respond to the amended complaint within 30 days after it is filed. Defendant's 9 motion for a more definite statement and motion to strike are DENIED as MOOT. (Reader, L)

Date Filed

Document Text

July 22, 2013

Filing 17 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 7/19/2013 GRANTING 9 defendant's motion to dismiss; plaintiff's complaint is DISMISSED with LEAVE TO AMEND; Plaintiff shall file any amended complaint in accordance with this order wit hin 30 days. Alternatively, plaintiff may file a notice of voluntary dismissal of her claims without prejudice pursuant to FRCP 41(a)(1)(A)(i) within 30 days. Defendant shall respond to the amended complaint within 30 days after it is filed. Defendant's 9 motion for a more definite statement and motion to strike are DENIED as MOOT. (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: Rolling v. State of California Department of Industrial Relations, Division of Labor Standards Enforcement
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Defendant: State of California Department of Industrial Relations, Division of Labor Standards Enforcement
Represented By:	Therese da Luz
Represented By:	Michael R Drayton
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 ]
Plaintiff: Emma J. Rolling
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?