Abordo v. Dept. of Public Safety
Plaintiff: Edmund M. Abordo and Cedric Ah Sing
Defendant: Dept. of Public Safety
Case Number: 1:2012cv00503
Filed: September 7, 2012
Court: US District Court for the District of Hawaii
Office: Hawaii Office
County: Honolulu
Presiding Judge: LESLIE E. KOBAYASHI
Presiding Judge: BARRY M. KURREN
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983
Jury Demanded By: None

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed Document Text
November 28, 2012 Opinion or Order Filing 22 ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION re: 18 . Signed by JUDGE LESLIE E. KOBAYASHI on 11/28/2012. [Order denies plaintiff's Motion for Reconsideration of the Court's Order filed 11/5/2012 (doc 16 ), the "Or der Severing Case and Denying Plaintiff Abordo's Motion for Preliminary Injunction" (afc)CERTIFICATE OF SERVICEParticipants registered to receive electronic notifications received this document electronically at the e-mail address listed on the Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF). Participants not registered to receive electronic notifications were served by first class mail on the date of this docket entry
November 21, 2012 Opinion or Order Filing 19 ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR REMAND 6 AND GRANTING MOTION TO CHANGE VENUE 8 . Signed by JUDGE LESLIE E. KOBAYASHI on 11/20/2012. ~ Excerpt of Conclusion: "This action is TRANSFERRED to the United States District Court for t he District of Arizona. The Clerk of Court is DIRECTED to close the file and send any pending motions or further documents received from Plaintiff to the United States District Court for the District of Arizona." ~ [MOTIONS terminated: Motion fo r Remand and Motion to Change Venue, docket entry nos. 6 and 8 , respectively. Plaintiff's EX PARTE MOTION to the Court to Reconsider its Prior Ruling, docket entry no. 18 , remains pending] (afc) CERT IFICATE OF SERVICEParticipants registered to receive electronic notifications received this document electronically at the e-mail address listed on the Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF). Participants not registered to receive electronic noti fications were served by first class mail on the date of this docket entry. A copy of the order has also been served this date addressed to Cedric Ah Sing, co-signator on the Motion to Remand (and as a named plaintiff in the instant case prior to the court's Order Severing the Case). A separate court's certificate of Service will be entered upon the electronic transfer of the case to the District of Arizona.
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 Hawaii District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Abordo v. Dept. of Public Safety
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Edmund M. Abordo
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 ]
Plaintiff: Cedric Ah Sing
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: Dept. of Public Safety
Represented By: April Luria
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.


Why Is My Information Online?