Johnson v. Umbarger LLC et al
| Scott Johnson |
| Does 1-10 and Umbarger LLC |
| 5:2020cv06542 |
| September 18, 2020 |
| US District Court for the Northern District of California |
| Virginia K DeMarchi |
| Lucy H Koh |
| American with Disabilities - Other |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 12101 |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on March 25, 2021. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 9
ORDER REASSIGNING CASE. Case reassigned using a proportionate, random, and blind system pursuant to General Order No. 44 to Judge Lucy H. Koh for all further proceedings. Notice: The assigned judge participates in the Cameras in the Courtroom Pilot Project. See General Order No. 65 and http://cand.uscourts.gov/cameras. Magistrate Judge Virginia K. DeMarchi remains as referral judge assigned to case, Reassignment Order Signed by CLERK on 9/23/2020. (Attachments: #1 Notice of Eligibility for Video Recording)(bwS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 9/23/2020)
|
| Filing 8 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. (pmcS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 9/23/2020) |
| Filing 7 CONSENT/DECLINATION to Proceed Before a US Magistrate Judge by Scott Johnson.. (Attachments: #1 Certificate/Proof of Service)(Seabock, Amanda) (Filed on 9/22/2020) |
| Filing 6 Summons Issued as to Umbarger LLC. (dhmS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 9/22/2020) |
| Filing 5 Initial Case Management Scheduling Order for Cases Asserting Denial of Right of Access under Americans with Disabilities Act. (dhmS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 9/18/2020) |
| Filing 4 Case assigned to Magistrate Judge Virginia K. DeMarchi. 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 10/2/2020. (anjS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 9/18/2020) |
| Filing 3 Proposed Summons. (Seabock, Amanda) (Filed on 9/18/2020) |
| Filing 2 Certificate of Interested Entities by Scott Johnson re #1 Complaint (Seabock, Amanda) (Filed on 9/18/2020) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT against All Defendants ( Filing fee $ 400, receipt number 0971-14956854.). Filed byScott Johnson. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet)(Seabock, Amanda) (Filed on 9/18/2020) |
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.
