Westbrook v. San Pablo Healthcare & Wellness Center
Plaintiff: Lynetta Westbrook
Defendant: San Pablo Healthcare & Wellness Center
Case Number: 3:2021cv06474
Filed: August 20, 2021
Court: US District Court for the Northern District of California
Presiding Judge: James Donato
Nature of Suit: P.I.: Other
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 1442
Jury Demanded By: Plaintiff
Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on June 9, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
November 29, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 15 Order. The request for additional briefing pages, Dkt. No. #14 , is denied. The parties are directed to file briefs on the remand motion only. The Court will decide whether a hearing date is warranted after the motion is fully briefed. Entered by Judge James Donato. (This is a text-only entry generated by the court. There is no document associated with this entry.)
November 19, 2021 Filing 14 Joint ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION Increase Page Limit and Request for Hearing Date re #10 MOTION to Remand and Response in Opposition to Defendant's Motion to Dismiss, #12 Opposition/Response to Motion, #9 MOTION to Dismiss filed by Lynetta Westbrook. Responses due by 11/23/2021. (Attachments: #1 Signature Page (Declarations/Stipulations) Stipulation to jointly seek administrative leave, #2 Proposed Order Proposed Order for Administrative Leave)(Smith, Dawn) (Filed on 11/19/2021)
October 18, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 13 ORDER. Defendant's motion to dismiss, Dkt. No. 9, and remand opposition, Dkt. No. 12, exceeded the page limits permitted by the Court's Standing Order for Civil Cases. Plaintiff's motion for remand and opposition to defendant's motion to dismiss, Dkt. No. 10, also exceeded the page limits and improperly combined a motion with a motion response. The filings, Dkt. Nos. 9-12, are consequently stricken, and the hearings that were noticed for October 21 and November 4, 2021, are vacated. The parties may renew the motions if they wish, and if so, are directed to meet and confer on a schedule. Signed by Judge James Donato on 10/18/2021. (This is a text-only entry generated by the court. There is no document associated with this entry.) (jdlc2S, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 10/18/2021)
October 12, 2021 Filing 12 OPPOSITION/RESPONSE (re #10 MOTION to Remand and Response in Opposition to Defendant's Motion to Dismiss ) filed bySan Pablo Healthcare & Wellness Center. (Zarmi, David) (Filed on 10/12/2021)
September 30, 2021 Filing 11 REPLY (re #10 MOTION to Remand and Response in Opposition to Defendant's Motion to Dismiss ) filed bySan Pablo Healthcare & Wellness Center. (Zarmi, David) (Filed on 9/30/2021)
September 27, 2021 Filing 10 MOTION to Remand and Response in Opposition to Defendant's Motion to Dismiss filed by Lynetta Westbrook. Motion Hearing set for 11/4/2021 10:00 AM in San Francisco, Courtroom 11, 19th Floor before Judge James Donato. Responses due by 10/11/2021. Replies due by 10/18/2021. (Attachments: #1 Declaration, #2 Exhibit, #3 Exhibit, #4 Exhibit, #5 Exhibit, #6 Proposed Order)(Downey, Paul) (Filed on 9/27/2021)
August 27, 2021 Filing 9 MOTION to Dismiss filed by San Pablo Healthcare & Wellness Center. Motion Hearing set for 10/21/2021 10:00 AM in San Francisco, Courtroom 11, 19th Floor before Judge James Donato. Responses due by 9/10/2021. Replies due by 9/17/2021. (Attachments: #1 P&A, #2 Declaration, #3 Exhibit, #4 Exhibit, #5 Exhibit, #6 Exhibit, #7 Proposed Order)(Zarmi, David) (Filed on 8/27/2021)
August 27, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 8 ORDER REASSIGNING CASE. Case reassigned using a proportionate, random, and blind system pursuant to General Order No. 44 to Judge James Donato for all further proceedings. Magistrate Judge Joseph C. Spero no longer assigned to case, Notice: The assigned judge participates in the Cameras in the Courtroom Pilot Project. See General Order No. 65 and http://cand.uscourts.gov/cameras.. Signed by Clerk on 08/27/2021. (Attachments: #1 Notice of Eligibility for Video Recording)(mbcS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 8/27/2021)
August 26, 2021 Filing 7 CLERK'S NOTICE OF IMPENDING REASSIGNMENT TO A U.S. DISTRICT COURT JUDGE: The Clerk of this Court will now randomly reassign this case to a District Judge because either (1) a party has not consented to the jurisdiction of a Magistrate Judge, or (2) time is of the essence in deciding a pending judicial action for which the necessary consents to Magistrate Judge jurisdiction have not been secured. You will be informed by separate notice of the district judge to whom this case is reassigned. ALL HEARING DATES PRESENTLY SCHEDULED BEFORE THE CURRENT MAGISTRATE JUDGE ARE VACATED AND SHOULD BE RE-NOTICED FOR HEARING BEFORE THE JUDGE TO WHOM THIS CASE IS REASSIGNED. This is a text only docket entry; there is no document associated with this notice. (klhS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 8/26/2021)
August 24, 2021 Filing 6 CONSENT/DECLINATION to Proceed Before a US Magistrate Judge by San Pablo Healthcare & Wellness Center.. (Zarmi, David) (Filed on 8/24/2021)
August 23, 2021 Filing 5 Initial Case Management Scheduling Order with ADR Deadlines: Case Management Statement due by 11/12/2021. Initial Case Management Conference set for 11/19/2021 02:00 PM in San Francisco, Courtroom F, 15th Floor. (elyS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 8/23/2021)
August 20, 2021 Filing 4 Case assigned to Magistrate Judge Joseph C. Spero. Counsel for plaintiff or the removing party is responsible for serving the Complaint or Notice of Removal, Summons and the assigned judge's standing orders and all other new case documents upon the opposing parties. For information, visit E-Filing A New Civil Case at http://cand.uscourts.gov/ecf/caseopening.Standing orders can be downloaded from the court's web page at www.cand.uscourts.gov/judges. Upon receipt, the summons will be issued and returned electronically. Counsel is required to send chambers a copy of the initiating documents pursuant to L.R. 5-1(e)(7). A scheduling order will be sent by Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF) within two business days. Consent/Declination due by 9/7/2021. (bwS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 8/20/2021)
August 20, 2021 Filing 3 Certificate of Interested Entities by San Pablo Healthcare & Wellness Center identifying Corporate Parent SOL Healthcare, LLC for San Pablo Healthcare & Wellness Center. re #1 Notice of Removal (Zarmi, David) (Filed on 8/20/2021)
August 20, 2021 Filing 2 Civil Cover Sheet by San Pablo Healthcare & Wellness Center . (Zarmi, David) (Filed on 8/20/2021)
August 20, 2021 Filing 1 NOTICE OF REMOVAL from Contra Costa County Superior Court. Their case number is MSC21-01215. (Filing fee $402 receipt number 0971-16307230). Filed bySan Pablo Healthcare & Wellness Center. (Zarmi, David) (Filed on 8/20/2021)

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 Northern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Westbrook v. San Pablo Healthcare & Wellness Center
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Lynetta Westbrook
Represented By: Dawn Marie Smith
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: San Pablo Healthcare & Wellness Center
Represented By: David Zarmi
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]

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.


Why Is My Information Online?