Barton v. Kimberly-Clark Corporation
| Allison Barton |
| Kimberly-Clark Corporation |
| 3:2024cv01337 |
| July 30, 2024 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of California |
| Steve B Chu |
| Gonzalo P Curiel |
| Contract: Other |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1332 oc Diversity-Other Contract |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on September 12, 2024. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 10
ORDER Granting Joint Motion to Extend Time to Respond to First Amended Complaint (ECF No. #9 ). Defendant has until 10/7/24 to file a Response to Plaintiff's First Amended Complaint. Signed by Judge Gonzalo P. Curiel on 9/12/24. (jmo)
|
| Filing 9 Joint MOTION for Extension of Time to File Answer re #8 Amended Complaint by Kimberly-Clark Corporation. (Loose, Timothy) (jmo). |
| Filing 8 AMENDED COMPLAINT with Jury Demand against Kimberly-Clark Corporation, filed by Allison Barton. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A - Allison Barton Venue Decl.) (Spector, Naomi) (bdc). |
|
Filing 7
ORDER Granting Joint Motion to Extend Time to Respond to Complaint (ECF No. #5 ) Kimberly-Clark Corporation answer due 9/23/2024. Signed by Judge Gonzalo P. Curiel on 8/19/24. (jmo)
|
| Filing 6 NOTICE of Appearance by Timothy William Loose on behalf of Kimberly-Clark Corporation (Loose, Timothy) (jmo). |
| Filing 5 Joint MOTION for Extension of Time to File Answer by Kimberly-Clark Corporation. (Loose, Timothy)Attorney Timothy William Loose added to party Kimberly-Clark Corporation(pty:dft) **QC E-mail sent. Attorney instructed to file a notice of appearance. ** (mjw). |
| Filing 4 SUMMONS Returned Executed by Allison Barton. Kimberly-Clark Corporation served. (Spector, Naomi) (jmo). |
| Filing 3 MINUTE ORDER OF TRANSFER. Magistrate Judge Karen S. Crawford is no longer assigned. Case reassigned to Magistrate Judge Steve B. Chu for all further proceedings. The new case number is 24cv01337-GPC-SBC.(no document attached) (jmo) |
| 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. (axc1) (anh). |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT with Jury Demand against Kimberly-Clark Corporation ( Filing fee $ 405 receipt number ACASDC-19057164.), filed by Allison Barton. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet, #2 Declaration)The new case number is 3:24-cv-1337-GPC-KSC. Judge Gonzalo P. Curiel and Magistrate Judge Karen S. Crawford are assigned to the case. (Spector, Naomi)(axc1) (anh). |
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
| Search for this case: Barton v. Kimberly-Clark Corporation | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Plaintiff: Allison Barton | |
| Represented By: | Naomi B. Spector |
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Finance | [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Defendant: Kimberly-Clark Corporation | |
| Represented By: | Timothy William Loose |
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Finance | [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
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.
