(PS) Devi v. Sacramento Bhartiya Sabha et al
Vineeta Devi |
Sacramento Bhartiya Sabha Doing business as Shree Laxmi Narayan Mandir and City of Sacramento |
2:2024cv00689 |
March 5, 2024 |
U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California |
Daniel J Calabretta |
Carolyn K Delaney |
Civil Rights: Other |
28 U.S.C. ยง 1983 Civil Rights |
None |
Docket Report
This docket was last retrieved on January 27, 2025. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
Document Text |
---|
Filing 16 MINUTE ORDER issued by Courtroom Deputy L. Kennison for Chief Magistrate Judge Carolyn K. Delaney on 5/3/2024: Defendants' Motions to Dismiss (ECF #4 , #8 ) are ordered SUBMITTED without appearance and argument pursuant to Local Rule 230(g). The hearing date of 5/8/2024, is VACATED. If the court subsequently concludes that oral argument or supplemental briefing is necessary, the court will notify the parties accordingly. (Text Only Entry)(Kennison, L) |
SERVICE BY MAIL: 16 Minute Order served on Vineeta Devi. (Kennison, L) |
Filing 15 CERTIFICATE / PROOF of SERVICE by Sacramento Bhartiya Sabha re #14 Reply to Response to Motion. (Ross, Zachery) |
Filing 14 REPLY by Sacramento Bhartiya Sabha to RESPONSE to #8 Motion to Dismiss,. (Ross, Zachery) |
Filing 13 REPLY by City of Sacramento to RESPONSE to #4 Motion to Dismiss,. (Kim, David) |
Filing 12 OPPOSITION to #8 Motion to Dismiss by Vineeta Devi. (Kyono, V) |
Filing 11 OPPOSITION to #4 Motion to Dismiss by Vineeta Devi. (Kyono, V) |
Filing 10 CERTIFICATE / PROOF of SERVICE by Sacramento Bhartiya Sabha re #9 Association of Counsel. Attorney Ross, Zachery A. added. (Ross, Zachery) |
Filing 9 ASSOCIATION of ATTORNEY: Added attorney Andrew Kentaro Murphy for Sacramento Bhartiya Sabha. (Ross, Zachery) |
Filing 8 MOTION to DISMISS by Sacramento Bhartiya Sabha. Attorney Talmachoff, Mary Kathleen added. Motion Hearing set for 5/8/2024 at 10:00 AM in Courtroom 24 (CKD) before Magistrate Judge Carolyn K. Delaney. (Attachments: #1 Memorandum)(Talmachoff, Mary) Modified on 4/4/2024 (Nair, C). |
Filing 7 SUMMONS RETURNED EXECUTED: City of Sacramento served on 3/17/2024. (Nair, C) |
Filing 6 SUMMONS RETURNED EXECUTED: Sacramento Bhartiya Sabha served on 3/14/2024. (Nair, C) |
Filing 5 CONSENT/DECLINE of U.S. Magistrate Judge Jurisdiction. Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 73(b)(1), this document is restricted to attorneys and court staff only. Judges do not have access to view this document and will be informed of a party's response only if all parties have consented to the referral. (Nair, C) |
Filing 4 MOTION to DISMISS by City of Sacramento. Attorney Kim, David S. added. Motion Hearing set for 5/8/2024 at 10:00 AM in Courtroom 24 (CKD) before Magistrate Judge Carolyn K. Delaney. (Attachments: #1 Points and Authorities , #2 Proof of Service)(Kim, David) Modified on 3/26/2024 (Licea Chavez, V). |
Filing 3 CIVIL NEW CASE DOCUMENTS ISSUED; (Attachments: #1 Consent Form) (Clemente Licea, O) |
Filing 2 SUMMONS ISSUED as to *City of Sacramento, Sacramento Bhartiya Sabha* with answer to complaint due within *21* days. Attorney *Vineeta Devi* *2545 Fulton Avenue* *Apt #32* *Sacramento, CA 95821*. (Clemente Licea, O) |
Filing 1 COMPLAINT against City of Sacramento, Sacramento Bhartiya Sabha by Vineeta Devi. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet) (Clemente Licea, O) |
RECEIPT number 200005856 for $405.00 for Vineeta Devi from Vineeta Devi. (Clemente Licea, O) |
SERVICE AT FRONT COUNTER: #2 Summons, #3 Civil New Case Documents for DJC served on Vineeta Devi. (Clemente Licea, O) |
Access additional case information on PACER
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the U.S. 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.