Fariba Z. Madison v. U.S. Bancorp et al
| Fariba Z. Madison |
| U.S. Bancorp, U.S. Bancorp Investments, Inc. and U.S. Bancorp Insurance Services, LLC |
| 3:2014cv04934 |
| November 6, 2014 |
| US District Court for the Northern District of California |
| San Francisco Office |
| Alameda |
| Edward M. Chen |
| Other Labor Litigation |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1332 |
| None |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
35
ORDER by Judge Edward M. Chen Granting 20 Plaintiff's Motion to Remand Action to State Court. (emcsec, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 1/27/2015)
|
|
Filing
33
STIPULATION AND ORDER re 30 STIPULATION WITH PROPOSED ORDER re 5 Initial Case Management Scheduling Order with ADR Deadlines, to Reset ADR Deadlines filed by U.S. Bancorp, U.S. Bancorp Insurance Services, LLC, U.S. Bancorp Investments, Inc.. Signed by Judge Edward M. Chen on 1/20/15. (bpf, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 1/20/2015)
|
|
Filing
24
STIPULATION AND ORDER (modified) re 22 Stipulation filed by Fariba Z. Madison, Set/Reset Deadlines as to 22 Stipulation, 10 MOTION to Dismiss Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). Responses due by 1/22/2015. Replies due by 1/29/2015. Motion Hearing set for 2/19/2015 01:30 PM in Courtroom 5, 17th Floor, San Francisco before Hon. Edward M. Chen.. Signed by Judge Edward M. Chen on 12/2/14. (bpf, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 12/2/2014)
|
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 Northern 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.
