Hogan v. Mohlenbrok et al
| Ru Hogan |
| David Mohlenbrok and City of Rocklin |
| 2:2024cv03566 |
| December 19, 2024 |
| U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California |
| John A Mendez |
| Sean C Riordan |
| Civil Rights: Accommodations |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1441 Petition for Removal- Civil Rights Act |
| Both |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on April 9, 2025. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 15 MOTION for ATTORNEY FEES by David Mohlenbrok. Motion Hearing set for 3/11/2025 at 01:00 PM in Courtroom 6 (JAM) before Senior District Judge John A. Mendez. (Attachments: #1 Declaration of Nathan T. Jackson, #2 Declaration of Lars T. Reed, #3 Proposed Order)(Jackson, Nathan) |
| Filing 14 MOTION to Disqualify Thomas Hogan as Counsel for Plaintiff. Motion Hearing set for 3/11/2025 at 01:00 PM in Courtroom 6 (JAM) before Senior District Judge John A. Mendez. (Attachments: #1 Declaration of Nathan T. Jackson, #2 Declaration of Heather Rodgers, #3 Declaration of David Mohlenbrok, #4 Request for Judicial Notice, #5 Proposed Order)(Jackson, Nathan) |
| Filing 13 MINUTE ORDER (Text Only Entry) issued by M York Courtroom Deputy for Senior District Judge John A. Mendez on 01/30/2025: The parties are ORDERED to file a Joint Status Report pursuant to the provisions of F.R.Cv.P. 16 and 26, in accordance with Local Rule 240 and the Court's Order Requiring Service of Process and Joint Status Report, within thirty (30) days after the Court's ruling on Defendant City of Rocklin's pending #11 Motion to Dismiss and #12 Motion to strike. (Deputy Clerk MDY) |
| Filing 12 MOTION to STRIKE #9 First Amended Complaint by City of Rocklin. Motion Hearing set for 03/11/2025, at 01:00 PM, in Courtroom 6 (JAM), before Senior District Judge John A. Mendez. (Attachments: #1 Declaration of Nathan T. Jackson, #2 Declaration of Heather Rodgers, #3 Declaration of David Mohlenbrok, #4 Request for Judicial Notice, #5 Proposed Order)(Jackson, Nathan) Modified on 1/30/2025 (MDY). |
| Filing 11 MOTION to DISMISS FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT by City of Rocklin. Motion Hearing set for 03/11/2025, at 01:00 PM, in Courtroom 6 (JAM), before Senior District Judge John A. Mendez. (Attachments: #1 Declaration, #2 Request for Judicial Notice, #3 Proposed Order)(Jackson, Nathan). Modified on 1/30/2025 (MDY). |
| Filing 10 MINUTE ORDER (Text Only Entry) issued by M York Courtroom Deputy for Senior District Judge John A. Mendez on 01/24/2025: Defendants David Mohlenbrok and City of Rocklin filed a Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. #4 ) and Motion to Strike Plaintiff's Complaint (ECF No. #5 ). Thereafter, and pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(a)(1)(B), Plaintiff Ru Hogan filed a First Amended Complaint ("FAC"). See ECF No. #9 . Plaintiff's timely filed FAC moots the Defendants' pending motions. See Ramirez v. Cnty. of San Bernardino, 806 F.3d 1002, 1008 (9th Cir. 2015); see also Prencipe v. Pishevar, No. CV 23-2570-GW-ASX, 2023 WL 5505870, at *2 (C.D. Cal. June 20, 2023). Accordingly, the Court DENIES as MOOT the motions at ECF No. #4 and ECF No. #5 and VACATES the hearing set for 2/11/2025. (Deputy Clerk MDY) |
| Filing 9 FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT against City of Rocklin by Ru Hogan. (Attachments: #1 Proof of Service)(Hogan, Thomas) |
| Filing 8 NOTICE to RESCHEDULE HEARING on #5 Motion to Strike, : Motion Hearing set for 2/11/2025 at 01:00 PM in Courtroom 6 (JAM) before Senior District Judge John A. Mendez. (Jackson, Nathan) |
| Filing 7 NOTICE to RESCHEDULE HEARING on #4 Motion to Dismiss, : Motion Hearing set for 2/11/2025 at 01:00 PM in Courtroom 6 (JAM) before Senior District Judge John A. Mendez. (Jackson, Nathan) |
| Filing 6 MINUTE ORDER (Text Only Entry) issued by R. Alvarez Relief Courtroom Deputy for Senior District Judge John A. Mendez on 12/27/2024: Defendants' #4 Motion to Dismiss, and Defendants' #5 Motion to Strike Plaintiff's Complaint re #1 Notice of Removal are noticed for hearing on a date not designated for the Court's civil law and motion calendar. Consequently, both hearing's set for 02/04/2025 are VACATED. Counsel shall contact the Courtroom Deputy for Senior District Judge John A. Mendez, via email to obtain an available date to re-notice each motion for hearing. (Alvarez, R.) |
| Filing 5 MOTION to STRIKE Plaintiff's Complaint by City of Rocklin, David Mohlenbrok. Motion Hearing set for 2/4/2025 at 01:00 PM in Courtroom 6 (JAM) before Senior District Judge John A. Mendez. (Attachments: #1 Declaration , #2 Declaration , #3 E-Filing Notice , #4 Request for Judicial Notice , #5 Proposed Order , #6 Proof of Service ) (Jackson, Nathan) Modified on 12/27/2024 (Licea Chavez, V). |
| Filing 4 MOTION to DISMISS by City of Rocklin, David Mohlenbrok. Motion Hearing set for 2/4/2025 at 01:00 PM in Courtroom 6 (JAM) before Senior District Judge John A. Mendez. (Attachments: #1 Declaration , #2 Notice Request for Judicial Notice, #3 Proposed Order , #4 Proof of Service ) (Jackson, Nathan) Modified on 12/27/2024 (Licea Chavez, V). |
| Filing 3 CERTIFICATE / PROOF of SERVICE by City of Rocklin, David Mohlenbrok. (Jackson, Nathan) |
| Filing 2 CIVIL NEW CASE DOCUMENTS ISSUED (Attachments: #1 Consent Form, #2 Order re Filing Requirements, #3 VDRP) (Kyono, V) |
| Filing 1 NOTICE of REMOVAL from Placer County Superior Court, case number S-CV-0051563 by All Defendants. (Filing fee $ 405, receipt number ACAEDC-11934860) (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet) (Jackson, Nathan) |
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.
