Subscribe Now for Instant Access
View the full docket, download filings, and get automated alerts for new case activity.
Explore Plans
Roderick Wright et al v. Renzenberger, Inc. et al, No. 2:13-cv-06642 (C.D. Cal.)
Case Title: Roderick Wright et al v. Renzenberger, Inc. et al
Case Type: Civil Case
Court: U.S. District Court for the Central District of California
Index Number(s): 2:2013cv6642, 2:13-cv-06642, 2:13-cv-06642-FMO-AGR
Nature of Suit: Labor: Other
Judge: Fernando M. Olguin
Magistrate Judge: Alicia G. Rosenberg
Case Opened: September 11, 2013
Docket Entries
Date Filed Dkt # Entry Text
Sep 11, 2013 CONFORMED COPY OF FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT against defendants Does 1 through 10, Lawrence Purnell, Renzenberger, Inc.,filed by plaintiffs Marcus Haynes, Jr, Fernando Olivarez. (SEE EXHIBITS) (esa)
Document
Sep 11, 2013 CONFORMED COPY OF ANSWER to First Amended Complaint (SEE EXHIBITS) filed by defendant Renzenberger, Inc.(esa)
Document
Sep 11, 2013 CONFORMED COPY OF ANSWER to First Amended Complaint (SEE EXHIBITS) filed by defendant Lawrence Purnell.(esa)
Document
Sep 11, 2013 1 NOTICE OF REMOVAL from Superior Court of CA, Los Angeles County, case number BC515105 with conformed copies of summons and first amended complaint (SEE EXHIBITS). Case assigned to Judge Gary A. Feess, discovery to Magistrate Judge Alicia G. Rosenberg; (Filing fee $ 400 paid ); filed by defendants Renzenberger, Inc., Lawrence Purnell.(esa) (Additional attachment(s) added on 9/13/2013: # 1 Notice of Assignment, # 2 Civil Cover Sheet) (mg). (Entered: 09/12/2013)
Document
Notice of Assignment
Civil Cover Sheet
Sep 11, 2013 2 EXHIBITS in support of Notice of Removal, 1 filed by Defendants Lawrence Purnell, Renzenberger, Inc.(esa) (Additional attachment(s) added on 9/13/2013: # 1 Part 2, # 2 Part 3) (mg). (Entered: 09/12/2013)
Document
Part 2
Part 3
Sep 11, 2013 3 CERTIFICATION AND NOTICE OF INTERESTED PARTIES filed by defendants Lawrence Purnell, Renzenberger, Inc., identifying Corporate Parent Peterson Manufacturing for Renzenberger, Inc. (esa) (mg). (Entered: 09/12/2013)
Document
Sep 11, 2013 4 DECLARATION of SANDY WALKER in support of Notice of Removal, 1 filed by Defendants Lawrence Purnell, Renzenberger, Inc.(esa) (mg). (Entered: 09/12/2013)
Document
Sep 11, 2013 5 DECLARATION of LAWRENCE PURNELL in support of Notice of Removal, 1 filed by Defendants Lawrence Purnell, Renzenberger, Inc.(esa) (mg). (Entered: 09/12/2013)
Document
Sep 11, 2013 6 DECLARATION of WILLIAM V. WHELAN in support of Notice of Removal, 1 filed by Defendants Lawrence Purnell, Renzenberger, Inc.(esa) (mg). (Entered: 09/12/2013)
Document
Sep 11, 2013 7 MEMORANDUM of Points and Authorities in support of Notice of Removal, 1 filed by defendants Lawrence Purnell, Renzenberger, Inc. (esa) (mg). (Entered: 09/12/2013)
Document
Sep 11, 2013 8 PROOF OF SERVICE filed by defendants Lawrence Purnell, Renzenberger, Inc. Notice of Removal, Memorandum of Points and Authorities, Declaration of Whelan, Declaration of Walker, Declaration of Purnell, Notice of Lodgment of Exhibits, Civil Cover Sheet, Notice of Interested Parties served on 9/10/13. (esa) (mg). (Entered: 09/12/2013)
Document
Sep 11, 2013 9 NOTICE TO PARTIES OF COURT-DIRECTED ADR PROGRAM filed.(esa) (Entered: 09/12/2013)
Document
Sep 13, 2013 10 ORDER REGARDING RULE 26(f) CONFERENCE AND JOINT REPORT by Judge Gary A. Feess. Rule 26 Meeting Report due by 10/28/2013. Scheduling Conference set for 11/4/2013 at 1:30 PM before Judge Gary A. Feess. See document for details. (smo) (Entered: 09/13/2013)
Document
Sep 16, 2013 11 Proof of Service filed by Defendants Does, Lawrence Purnell, Renzenberger, Inc. (Whelan, William) (Entered: 09/16/2013)
Document
Sep 17, 2013 12 NOTICE TO FILER OF DEFICIENCIES in Electronically Filed Documents RE: Proof of Service 11 . The following error(s) was found: Incorrect event selected. Other error(s) with document(s) are specified below. The correct event is: Service of Subsequent Document Filings-Proof of Service (subsequent documents). Other error(s) with document(s): Proof of Service should be linked back to the specific documents served. In response to this notice the court may order (1) an amended or correct document to be filed (2) the document stricken or (3) take other action as the court deems appropriate. You need not take any action in response to this notice unless and until the court directs you to do so. (bm) (Entered: 09/17/2013)
Document
Sep 18, 2013 13 RESPONSE BY THE COURT TO NOTICE TO FILER OF DEFICIENCIES IN ELECTRONICALLY FILED DOCUMENTS 12 by Clerk of Court that the document is accepted as filed. RE: Proof of Service 11 . (bm) (Entered: 09/19/2013)
Document
Sep 30, 2013 14 TEXT ONLY ENTRY: Magistrate Judge Alicia G. Rosenberg is participating in a pilot project regarding the submission of SEALED DOCUMENTS. Effective July 8, 2013, all proposed sealed documents pertaining to discovery matters referred to the magistrate judge must be submitted via e-mail to the Judges Chambers email address at AGR_Chambers@cacd.uscourts.gov. Please refer to the judges procedures and schedules for detailed instructions for submission of sealed documents. THERE IS NO PDF DOCUMENT ASSOCIATED WITH THIS ENTRY. (mp) TEXT ONLY ENTRY (Entered: 09/30/2013)
Document
Oct 4, 2013 15 MINUTE ORDER IN CHAMBERS ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE by Judge Gary A. Feess: Rnezenberger is hereby ORDERED TO SHOW CAUSE why this case should not be dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction no later than Friday, October 18, 2013. Failure to respond will be deemed consent to dismissal of the action. (bp) (Entered: 10/04/2013)
Document
Oct 10, 2013 16 RESPONSE IN SUPPORT Defendants' Motion for Removal/Joint Stipulation in Response to the Court's Order to Show Cause Dated October 4, 2013 filed by Defendant Renzenberger, Inc.. (Attachments: # 1 Proof of Service)(Whelan, William) (Entered: 10/10/2013)
Document
Proof of Service
Oct 15, 2013 17 MINUTE ORDER (IN CHAMBERS) ORDER VACATING ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE by Judge Gary A. Feess: On October 4, 2013, the Court ordered Defendant to show cause why this case should not be dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, due to its failure to properly allege amount in controversy and citizenship in the Notice of Removal from state court. (Docket No. 15, [10/4/2013 Order] at 3.) The Parties timely filed a joint response on October 10, 2013. (Docket No. 16, [Response to Order to Show Cause].) Based on the Response, it appears that this Court has subject matter jurisdiction. The Courts October 4, 2013, Order to Show Cause is accordingly VACATED. re: Response in Support of Motion, 16, Minutes of In Chambers Order 15 . (lw) (Entered: 10/16/2013)
Document

This is a partial docket sheet. Subscribers can access the full docket and download PDF filings.

Subscribe now for instant access

PACER Links

PacerDash lets you track and monitor dockes without the complexity and cost of accessing PACER directly. If you have an existing PACER subscription you can access this docket using the U.S. Court's CM/ECF system.

Access this docket on the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California Case Management/Electronic Case Files (CM/ECF) system

News Links

Search for this case: Roderick Wright et al v. Renzenberger, Inc. et al, No. 2:13-cv-06642 (C.D. Cal.)

[ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]

© PacerMonkey LLC Legal