Linlor v. Five9, Inc. et al
| James Linlor |
| Five9, Inc. and John Does #1-#9 |
| 3:2017cv00218 |
| February 3, 2017 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of California |
| San Diego Office |
| San Diego |
| Michael M. Anello |
| Barbara Lynn Major |
| Other Statutory Actions |
| 47 U.S.C. ยง 0227 |
| Both |
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
62
DEFAULT JUDGMENT in favor of James Linlor against Futero, Inc. in the total amount of $8,000.00.(All non-registered users served via U.S. Mail Service)(rmc)
|
|
Filing
50
ORDER Denying 49 Plaintiff's Ex Parte Motion for Modification to Order to Permit Interlocutory Appeal. Signed by Judge Michael M. Anello on 4/5/2018. (All non-registered users served via U.S. Mail Service)(rmc)
|
|
Filing
47
ORDER (1) denying 44 Plaintiff's Ex Parte Motion to Add Scott Stagg as a Defendant; and (2) Denying as moot 46 Plaintiff's Ex Parte Motion for a Third Party Subpoena to Identify Remaining Defendant(s). Signed by Judge Michael M. Anello on 3/22/2018. (All non-registered users served via U.S. Mail Service)(anh)
|
|
Filing
37
ORDER granting 29 Defendant's Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint. The Court GRANTS Five9's Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint and DISMISSES Plaintiff's claims against Defendant Five9 , Inc. See Knappenberger, 566 F.3d at 942 (stating that leave to amend should be granted unless amendment would be futile). The Clerk of Court is instructed to terminate the action as to Defendant Five9, Inc. Signed by Judge Michael M. Anello on 11/29/2017. (All non-registered users served via U.S. Mail Service)(acc)
|
|
Filing
26
ORDER Granting Defendant's 10 Motion to Dismiss; and Granting Plaintiff's 12 Motion for Leave to Amend. The Court grants Defendant's motion to dismiss, and dismisses Plaintiff's TCPA claims without prejudice and with leave to amend. The Court grants Plaintiff's motion for leave to amend the FAC to add Futero, Inc. as a defendant to this action. The Court further orders that Plaintiff must file the Second Amended Complaint on or before 7/28/2017. Signed by Judge Michael M. Anello on 7/11/2017. (ag) Modified on 7/12/2017 to note that all non-registered users were mailed a copy of this order (ag).
|
|
Filing
9
ORDER denying Plaintiff's 8 Motion to Remand to State Court. Plaintiff filed an "opposition to Defendant's notice of removal" and "request to remand". Court construes Pla's filing as motion to remand, and as a mot ion for sanctions. Court is satisfied that it has subject matter jurisdiction over this case, and denies Pla's motion to remand based on lack of subject matter jurisdiction. Court is unpersuaded that Dft removed this action for "improper purposes". Court denies Pla's motion for sanctions. Signed by Judge Michael M. Anello on 2/15/2017. (All non-registered users served via U.S. Mail Service) (jah)
|
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.
