Hendricks v. Lotus Cars USA, Inc. et al
| Nikole Hendricks |
| Lotus Cars USA, Inc. and Does 1 through 25 |
| 3:2020cv02471 |
| December 18, 2020 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of California |
| Michael S Berg |
| Thomas J Whelan |
| Civil Rights: Jobs |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1441 ed |
| Both |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on February 1, 2021. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 14 REPLY to Response to Motion re #10 MOTION to Dismiss Pursuant to FRCP 12(b)(2) filed by Lotus Cars USA, Inc.. (Attachments: #1 Objections to Hendricks Declaration, #2 Proposed Order re Objections to Hendricks Declaration)(Rich, Jamie). QC email: proposed order attached (jdt). |
| Filing 13 RESPONSE in Opposition re #10 MOTION to Dismiss Pursuant to FRCP 12(b)(2) filed by Nikole Hendricks. (Attachments: #1 Declaration of Nikole Hendricks)(Collmann, Jesse) (jdt). |
Filing 12
ORDER Denying as Moot Defendant's Ex Parte Applications (Docs. #7 , #8 ). Signed by Judge Thomas J. Whelan on 1/5/2021. (jdt)
|
| Filing 11 NOTICE [Amended] by Lotus Cars USA, Inc. re #10 MOTION to Dismiss Pursuant to FRCP 12(b)(2) (Rich, Jamie) (jdt). |
| Filing 10 MOTION to Dismiss Pursuant to FRCP 12(b)(2) by Lotus Cars USA, Inc.. (Attachments: #1 Declaration of Jamie Rich, #2 Declaration of James Carter, #3 Declaration of Valerie Jogwick, #4 Proposed Order)(Rich, Jamie). QC email: proposed order (jdt). |
| Filing 9 NOTICE of Appearance by Jesse A Collmann on behalf of Nikole Hendricks (Collmann, Jesse)Attorney Jesse A Collmann added to party Nikole Hendricks(pty:pla) (jpp). |
| Filing 8 MOTION for Extension of Time to File Answer re #7 Ex Parte MOTION to Shorten Time to Hear Motion Extending Time to Respond to Complaint by Lotus Cars USA, Inc.. (Attachments: #1 Declaration of Marie Dyer, #2 Proposed Order)(Rich, Jamie) (jpp). |
| Filing 7 Ex Parte MOTION to Shorten Time to Hear Motion Extending Time to Respond to Complaint by Lotus Cars USA, Inc.. (Attachments: #1 Declaration of Jamie Rich, #2 Exhibit A to Declaration of Jamie Rich, #3 Exhibit B to Declaration of Jamie Rich, #4 Proposed Order)(Rich, Jamie) (jpp). |
| Filing 6 DECLARATION re #1 Notice of Removal, of Jamie Rich in Support of Defendant's Notice of Removal by Defendant Lotus Cars USA, Inc.. (Rich, Jamie) (jpp). |
| Filing 5 NOTICE of Errata to Declaration of Jamie Rich in Support of Defendant's Notice of Removal by Lotus Cars USA, Inc. (Rich, Jamie) (jpp). |
| Filing 4 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE by Lotus Cars USA, Inc. (Rich, Jamie) (jpp). |
| Filing 3 NOTICE of Party With Financial Interest by Lotus Cars USA, Inc. Identifying Corporate Parent Lotus Advance Technologies sdn bhd, Corporate Parent Lotus Group International Limited, Corporate Parent Group Lotus Limited for Lotus Cars USA, Inc. (zda)(jrd) |
| Filing 2 Corporate Disclosure Statement by Lotus Cars USA, Inc. identifying Corporate Parent Lotus Advance Technologies sdn bhd, Corporate Parent Lotus Group International Limited, Corporate Parent Group Lotus Limited for Lotus Cars USA, Inc. (zda)(jrd) |
| Filing 1 NOTICE OF REMOVAL With Jury Demand (Filing fee $402.00 receipt number ACASDC-15077445.), filed by Lotus Cars USA, Inc. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet, #2 Declaration of Jamie Rich, #3 Declaration Valerie Jogwick)The new case number is 3:20-cv-2471-W-MSB. Judge Thomas J. Whelan and Magistrate Judge Michael S. Berg are assigned to the case.(zda)(jrd) |
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.
