R-12 A, LLC v. Gonzalez et al
| R-12 A, LLC |
| Wulfrano Gonzalez and DOES 1 to 10 |
| 3:2019cv00237 |
| February 1, 2019 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of California |
| Cynthia Bashant |
| Bernard G Skomal |
| Rent Lease & Ejectment |
| 29 U.S.C. ยง 1161 |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on February 5, 2019. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 4
ORDER Remanding Case. Court sua sponte remands this case. Defendant's Motion to Proceed IFP #2 is denied as moot. The Clerk is instructed to close the file. Signed by Judge Cynthia Bashant on 2/5/2019. (Certified copy of this Order mailed to San Diego County Superior Court) (All non-registered users served via U.S. Mail Service) (jah) (sjt).
|
| Filing 3 NOTICE of Party With Financial Interest by Wulfrano Gonzalez. No Parties With Financial Interest. (All non-registered users served via U.S. Mail Service)(als) |
| Filing 2 MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis by Wulfrano Gonzalez. (als) |
| Filing 1 NOTICE OF REMOVAL from Superior Court of California, County of San Diego, case number 37-2018-00058374-CL-UD-CTL. IFP Filed, filed by Wulfrano Gonzalez. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet, #2 Exhibit State Court Documents)The new case number is 3:19-cv-00237-BAS-BGS. Judge Cynthia Bashant and Magistrate Judge Bernard G. Skomal are assigned to the case.(als) |
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 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.
