Johnson v. Ortiz, Sr. et al
Plaintiff: Scott Johnson
Defendant: Does 1-10 and David G. Ortiz, Sr.
Case Number: 5:2018cv05103
Filed: August 20, 2018
Court: US District Court for the Northern District of California
Office: San Jose Office
County: Alameda
Presiding Judge: Beth Labson Freeman
Referring Judge: Susan van Keulen
Nature of Suit: American with Disabilities - Other
Cause of Action: 42 U.S.C. ยง 12101
Jury Demanded By: Defendant
Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on October 12, 2018. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
October 12, 2018 Opinion or Order Filing 14 ORDER REASSIGNING CASE. Case reassigned to Judge Beth Labson Freeman pursuant to Clerk's Notice of Impending Reassignment to a U.S. District Court Judge. This case is assigned to a judge who participates in the Cameras in the Courtroom Pilot Project. See General Order 65 and http://cand.uscourts.gov/cameras. Magistrate Judge Susan van Keulen remains as referral judge assigned to the case. Reassignment Order signed by Executive Committee on 10/12/2018. (Attachments: #1 Notice of Eligibility for Video Recording) (bwS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 10/12/2018)
October 12, 2018 Filing 13 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. (ofr, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 10/12/2018)
October 12, 2018 Filing 12 CONSENT/DECLINATION to Proceed Before a US Magistrate Judge by David G. Ortiz, Sr... (Baker, Dania) (Filed on 10/12/2018)
October 12, 2018 Filing 11 Defendant Ortiz's ANSWER to Complaint with Jury Demand byDavid G. Ortiz, Sr.. (Baker, Dania) (Filed on 10/12/2018)
September 21, 2018 Filing 10 NOTICE of Appearance by Jennifer Ann McAllister (Attachments: #1 Proof of service)(McAllister, Jennifer) (Filed on 9/21/2018)
September 21, 2018 Filing 9 NOTICE of Appearance by Farrell Jay Goodman (Attachments: #1 Proof of service)(Goodman, Farrell) (Filed on 9/21/2018)
September 21, 2018 Filing 8 SUMMONS Returned Executed by Scott Johnson. David G. Ortiz, Sr. served on 9/21/2018, answer due 10/12/2018. (Carson, Chris) (Filed on 9/21/2018)
August 23, 2018 Filing 7 CONSENT/DECLINATION to Proceed Before a US Magistrate Judge by Scott Johnson.. (Attachments: #1 Certificate/Proof of Service)(Carson, Chris) (Filed on 8/23/2018)
August 21, 2018 Filing 6 Summons Issued as to David G. Ortiz, Sr.. (cv, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 8/21/2018)
August 21, 2018 Filing 5 Initial Case Management Scheduling Order for Cases Asserting Denial of Right of Access under Americans with Disabilities Act. (cv, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 8/21/2018)
August 20, 2018 Filing 4 Case assigned to Magistrate Judge Susan van Keulen. 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 9/4/2018. (bwS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 8/20/2018)
August 20, 2018 Filing 3 Proposed Summons. (Carson, Chris) (Filed on 8/20/2018)
August 20, 2018 Filing 2 Certificate of Interested Entities by Scott Johnson (Carson, Chris) (Filed on 8/20/2018)
August 20, 2018 Filing 1 COMPLAINT against All Defendants ( Filing fee $ 400, receipt number 0971-12610594.). Filed byScott Johnson. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet)(Carson, Chris) (Filed on 8/20/2018)

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: Johnson v. Ortiz, Sr. et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Does 1-10
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: David G. Ortiz, Sr.
Represented By: Dania Marie Baker
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 ]
Plaintiff: Scott Johnson
Represented By: Chris Carson
Represented By: Jennifer Ann McAllister
Represented By: Farrell Jay Goodman
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?