Blaha v. Cynet Systems INC et al
| Anton Blaha |
| Cynet Systems INC, Abbott Laboratories Inc. and Does 1-50 |
| 3:2024cv00840 |
| May 10, 2024 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of California |
| David D Leshner |
| Andrew G Schopler |
| Labor: Other |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1332 Diversity Action |
| Defendant |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on May 10, 2024. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 5 Corporate Disclosure Statement by Abbott Laboratories Inc., Cynet Systems INC. No Corporate Parents/Interested Parties. (axc1) |
| Filing 4 NOTICE of Party With Financial Interest by Abbott Laboratories Inc., Cynet Systems INC. Identifying Corporate Parent Abbott Laboratories for Abbott Laboratories Inc., Cynet Systems INC. (axc1) |
| Filing 3 ANSWER to Complaint (Notice of Removal) by Abbott Laboratories Inc., Cynet Systems INC. (axc1) |
| Filing 2 ANSWER to Complaint (Notice of Removal) by Abbott Laboratories Inc., Cynet Systems INC. (axc1) |
| Filing 1 NOTICE OF REMOVAL ( Filing fee $ 405 receipt number ACASDC-18839695.), filed by Abbott Laboratories Inc., Cynet Systems INC. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet, #2 Exhibits, #3 Complaint, #4 Declaration #5 Certificate of Service) The new case number is 3:24-cv-840-AGS-DDL. Judge Andrew G. Schopler and Magistrate Judge David D. Leshner are assigned to the case.(axc1) |
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.
