Hofmann v. Dutch, LLC et al
| Sonia Hofmann |
| Dutch, LLC and Does 1 through 100 |
| 3:2014cv02418 |
| October 9, 2014 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of California |
| San Diego Office |
| Los Angeles |
| Jill L. Burkhardt |
| Gonzalo P. Curiel |
| Constitutionality of State Statutes |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1331 |
| Defendant |
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
53
ORDER Denying 43 Motion for Preliminary Approval of Proposed Class Settlement. The Court will permit the parties an additional sixty days from the issuance of this Order to file a renewed motion for preliminary approval of class action settlement. Signed by Judge Gonzalo P. Curiel on 3/2/17. (dlg)
|
|
Filing
48
ORDER Providing Tentative Ruling Denying 43 MOTION 1) Granting Preliminary Approval of Class Settlement; 2) Scheduling a Fairness and Final Approval Hearing; and 3) Directing that Notice be Sent to Class Members filed by Sonia Hofmann. Signed by Judge Gonzalo P. Curiel on 1/10/17.(dlg)
|
|
Filing
37
ORDER Denying 35 Preliminary Approval of Proposed Class Settlement. The Court will permit the parties an additional sixty (60) days from the issuance of this Order to file a renewed motion for preliminary approval of class action settlement that cures the deficiencies identified in this Order. Signed by Judge Gonzalo P. Curiel on 4/26/16. (dlg)
|
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 Southern 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.
