Ramos v. Saeed et al
| Oscar Ramos |
| Loiy Z Saeed Doing business as Aztec Market, Steve Wilcox and Pamela R Wilcox |
| 2:2025cv00872 |
| March 17, 2025 |
| U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California |
| Sean C Riordan |
| Civil Rights: Americans with Disabilities - Other |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 12101 Americans with Disabilities Act |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on March 17, 2025. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 4 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. (Mac Bride, Richard) |
| Filing 3 CIVIL NEW CASE DOCUMENTS ISSUED; (Attachments: #1 Consent Form, #2 VDRP) (Deputy Clerk VLK) |
| Filing 2 SUMMONS ISSUED as to *Loiy Z Saeed, Pamela R Wilcox, Steve Wilcox* with answer to complaint due within *21* days. Attorney *Richard Mac Bride* *Law Offices of Richard Mac Bride* *855 Marina Bay Parkway, Suite 210* *Richmond, CA 94804*. (Deputy Clerk VLK) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT against All Defendants by Oscar Ramos. Attorney Mac Bride, Richard added. (Filing fee $ 405, receipt number ACAEDC-12100860) (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet)(Mac Bride, Richard) |
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.
