Cantu v. Dealer Dot Com, Inc. et al
| Jesse Cantu |
| Dealer Dot Com, Inc. a Delaware Corporation doing business as Dealer.com and Does 1 through 25 |
| 3:2022cv01938 |
| December 8, 2022 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of California |
| Roger T Benitez |
| Michael S Berg |
| Other Statutory Actions |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1331 Fed. Question |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on January 18, 2023. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 5
ORDER Granting Joint Motion For Extension Of Time To Respond To Complaint [ECF No. #4 ]. Signed by Judge Roger T. Benitez on 1/18/2023. (ddf)
|
| Filing 4 Joint MOTION for Extension of Time to File Answer or Otherwise Respond to Complaint by Dealer Dot Com, Inc.. (Fox, Adam)Attorney Adam R Fox added to party Dealer Dot Com, Inc.(pty:dft) (ddf). |
| Filing 3 SUMMONS Returned Executed by Jesse Cantu. Dealer Dot Com, Inc. served. (Ferrell, Scott) (ddf). |
| Filing 2 Summons Issued. Counsel receiving this notice electronically should print this summons and serve it in accordance with Rule 4, Fed.R.Civ.P and LR 4.1. (fth) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT against Dealer Dot Com, Inc., Does 1 through 25 ( Filing fee $ 402 receipt number ACASDC-17407345.), filed by Jesse Cantu. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet)The new case number is 3:22-cv-1938-BEN-MSB. Judge Roger T. Benitez and Magistrate Judge Michael S. Berg are assigned to the case. (Ferrell, Scott)(fth) |
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.
