VibrantCare Rehabilitation, Inc. v. Deol
| VibrantCare Rehabilitation, Inc. |
| Kiran Deol |
| 2:2020cv00791 |
| April 16, 2020 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of California |
| Allison Claire |
| Morrison C England |
| Other Statutory Actions |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1331 |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on April 15, 2024. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 14 REPLY by Kiran Deol to RESPONSE to #5 Motion to Dismiss. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A)(Disbrow, Matthew) |
| Filing 13 OPPOSITION to #5 Motion to Dismiss by VibrantCare Rehabilitation, Inc. (Westbrook, Geoffrey) Modified on 5/29/2020 (Huang, H). |
Filing 12
PRO HAC VICE ORDER signed by Senior Judge Morrison C. England, Jr. on 5/21/2020 GRANTING #10 Application as to Attorney Kevin J. Mahoney, PHV, to represent VibrantCare Rehabilitation, Inc. (York, M)
|
|
Filing 11
PRO HAC VICE ORDER signed by Senior Judge Morrison C. England, Jr. on 5/21/2020 GRANTING #9 Application as to Attorney Michael D. Wexler, PHV, to represent VibrantCare Rehabilitation, Inc. (York, M)
|
| Filing 10 PRO HAC VICE APPLICATION and PROPOSED ORDER submitted by VibrantCare Rehabilitation, Inc. for attorney Kevin J. Mahoney to appear Pro Hac Vice. (Filing fee $ 225, receipt number 0972-8895911) (Westbrook, Geoffrey) |
| Filing 9 PRO HAC VICE APPLICATION and PROPOSED ORDER submitted by VibrantCare Rehabilitation, Inc. for attorney Michael D. Wexler to appear Pro Hac Vice. (Filing fee $ 225, receipt number 0972-8895905) (Westbrook, Geoffrey) |
|
Filing 8
PRO HAC VICE ORDER signed by Senior Judge Morrison C. England, Jr. on 5/13/2020 GRANTING #7 Application as to Attorney Jack Vrett, PHV, to represent Kiran Deol. (York, M)
|
| Filing 7 PRO HAC VICE APPLICATION and PROPOSED ORDER submitted by Kiran Deol for attorney Jack Vrett to appear Pro Hac Vice. (Filing fee $225, receipt number 0972-8885380) (Disbrow, Matthew) Modified on 5/14/2020 (York, M). |
| Filing 6 MINUTE ORDER (Text Only) issued by courtroom deputy for Senior District Judge, Morrison C. England, Jr.: On the Court's own motion and pursuant to Local Rule 230(g), the 6/11/2020 hearing on the Motion to Dismiss #5 is vacated and submitted without appearance and argument. The opposition or statement of non-opposition and reply due dates shall be filed in accordance with the original motion hearing date. If the Court determines that oral argument is needed it will be scheduled at a later date. Any outstanding request for telephonic appearance is denied as moot. (Deutsch, S) |
| Filing 5 MOTION to DISMISS by Kiran Deol. Attorney Disbrow, Matthew Scott added. Motion Hearing set for 6/11/2020 at 02:00 PM in Courtroom 7 (MCE) before Senior Judge Morrison C. England Jr.. (Attachments: #1 Memorandum)(Disbrow, Matthew) Modified on 5/13/2020 (Becknal, R). |
| Filing 4 SUMMONS RETURNED EXECUTED: Kiran Deol served on 4/20/2020. (Westbrook, Geoffrey) |
| Filing 3 CIVIL NEW CASE DOCUMENTS ISSUED; (Attachments: #1 Consent Form, #2 VDRP) (Benson, A.) |
| Filing 2 SUMMONS ISSUED as to *Kiran Deol* with answer to complaint due within *21* days. Attorney *Geoffrey Christopher Westbrook* *Seyfarth Shaw LLP* *400 Capitol Mall, Suite 2350* *Sacramento, CA 95814*. (Benson, A.) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT against Deol by VibrantCare Rehabilitation, Inc. (Filing fee $ 400, receipt number 0972-8847842) (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet)(Westbrook, Geoffrey) |
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 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.
