Johnson v. Kharbanda et al
| Scott Johnson |
| Sunil K. Kharbanda, Renu Kharbanda and Seven Plus Markets, Inc. |
| 5:2019cv03450 |
| June 18, 2019 |
| US District Court for the Northern District of California |
| Susan van Keulen |
| American with Disabilities - Other |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 12101 |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on August 6, 2019. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 13
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE RE SETTLEMENT. Dispositive Motion due by 10/7/2019. Show Cause Response due by 10/15/2019. Order to Show Cause Hearing set for 10/22/2019 10:00 AM. Signed by Judge Susan van Keulen on 8/6/19. (dmcS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 8/6/2019)
|
| Filing 12 NOTICE by Scott Johnson of settlement (Attachments: #1 Proposed Order, #2 Certificate/Proof of Service)(Seabock, Amanda) (Filed on 8/6/2019) |
| Filing 11 CONSENT/DECLINATION to Proceed Before a US Magistrate Judge by Renu Kharbanda, Sunil K. Kharbanda, Seven Plus Markets, Inc... (Karlin, David) (Filed on 7/22/2019) |
| Filing 10 CLERK'S NOTICE Re: Consent or Declination: Defendants shall file a consent or declination to proceed before a magistrate judge. Note that any party is free to withhold consent to proceed before a magistrate judge without adverse substantive consequences. The forms are available at: http://cand.uscourts.gov/civilforms. Consent/Declination due by 8/5/2019. (dmcS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 7/22/2019) |
| Filing 9 SUMMONS Returned Executed by Scott Johnson. Seven Plus Markets, Inc. served on 7/9/2019, answer due 7/30/2019. (Seabock, Amanda) (Filed on 7/16/2019) |
| Filing 8 STIPULATION to Extend Time to Respond to Initial Complaint filed by Seven Plus Markets, Inc.. (Karlin, David) (Filed on 7/9/2019) |
| Filing 7 CONSENT/DECLINATION to Proceed Before a US Magistrate Judge by Scott Johnson.. (Seabock, Amanda) (Filed on 6/20/2019) |
| Filing 6 Summons Issued as to Renu Kharbanda, Sunil K. Kharbanda, Seven Plus Markets, Inc.. (cv, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 6/18/2019) |
| 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 6/18/2019) |
| 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 7/2/2019. (haS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 6/18/2019) |
| Filing 3 Proposed Summons. (Seabock, Amanda) (Filed on 6/18/2019) |
| Filing 2 Certificate of Interested Entities by Scott Johnson re #1 Complaint, (Seabock, Amanda) (Filed on 6/18/2019) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT For Damages And Injunctive Relief For Violations Of: Americans With Disabilities Act; Unruh Civil Rights Act against All Defendants ( Filing fee $ 400, receipt number 0971-13445530.). Filed byScott Johnson. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet)(Seabock, Amanda) (Filed on 6/18/2019) |
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 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.
