Brooks v. Washington Mutual, Inc. et al
| Peter S. Brooks |
| Washington Mutual, Inc. and JP Morgan Chase |
| 4:2012cv00765 |
| February 16, 2012 |
| US District Court for the Northern District of California |
| San Francisco Office |
| Sonoma |
| Laurel Beeler |
| Securities/Commodities/Exchanges |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1441 |
| 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
59
ORDER CONTINUING HEARING DATE ON DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO DISMISS TO 11/15/2012. (whalc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 10/23/2012)
|
|
Filing
46
ORDER CONTINUING CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE. Case Management Statement due by 11/8/2012. Initial Case Management Conference set for 11/15/2012 11:00 AM in Courtroom 8, 19th Floor, San Francisco. Signed by Judge William Alsup on 9/26/2012. (whasec, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 9/26/2012)
|
|
Filing
37
ORDER CONTINUING CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE [re 36 Letter filed by Peter S. Brooks ]. Case Management Statement due by 8/16/2012. Case Management Conference set for 8/23/2012 11:00 AM in Courtroom 8, 19th Floor, San Francisco. THERE WILL BE NO FURTHER CONTINUANCES WHATSOEVER. Signed by Judge William Alsup on 7/10/2012. (whasec, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 7/10/2012)
|
|
Filing
21
ORDER REQUIRING CLARIFICATION AND POSTPONING BRIEFING AND HEARING ON MOTION TO DISMISS re 20 Amended Complaint, filed by Peter S. Brooks. Signed by Judge Alsup on April 19, 2012. (whalc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/19/2012)
|
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.
