Zepeda v. Schuld et al
| Ricardo Zepeda |
| Walter N. Schuld, Brian Bubar, Bayse, Rocky, Shawn Pate and Chris Magnus |
| 4:2013cv05761 |
| December 12, 2013 |
| US District Court for the Northern District of California |
| Oakland Office |
| Contra Costa |
| Kandis A. Westmore |
| Other Civil Rights |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 |
| Plaintiff |
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
104
ORDER by Judge Kandis A. Westmore granting in part and denying in part Richmond's 89 Motion to Dismiss. Richmond shall file an answer within 14 days. (kawlc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 10/5/2017)
|
|
Filing
84
ORDER by Judge Kandis A. Westmore granting Defendants' 69 , 70 Motions to Dismiss; ORDER discharging Order to Show Cause. Amended Pleadings due by 7/17/2017. (kawlc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 5/8/2017)
|
|
Filing
82
ORDER by Judge Kandis A. Westmore denying Plaintiff's 76 Motion to Appoint Counsel. (kawlc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 5/2/2017)
|
|
Filing
73
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE to Plaintiff Ricardo Zepeda why the case should not be dismissed for failure to prosecute. Show Cause Response due by 4/17/2017; ORDER continuing hearings on Defendants' 69 , 70 Motions to Dismiss to 5/4/2017 11:00 AM in Courtroom 4, 3rd Floor, Oakland before Magistrate Judge Kandis A. Westmore. Plaintiff's oppositions are due by 4/17/2017. Defendants' Replies due by 4/24/2017. Signed by Judge Kandis A. Westmore on 4/3/2017. (kawlc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/3/2017)
|
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.
