Skip to content.
About GPO   |   Newsroom/Media   |   Congressional Relations   |   Inspector General   |   Careers   |   Contact   |   askGPO   |   Help  
 

  FDsys > More Information
(Search string is required)
 

14-828 - Kaur et al v. City of Lodi et al


Download Files

Metadata

Document in Context
14-828 - Kaur et al v. City of Lodi et al
May 22, 2014
PDF | More
ORDER denying Plaintiffs' 12 Motion for Expedited Discovery, signed by Magistrate Judge Allison Claire on 5/21/14. (Kastilahn, A)
August 7, 2014
PDF | More
ORDER signed by Judge Garland E. Burrell, Jr. on 8/6/2014 GRANTING IN PART and DENYING IN PART 14 Motion to Dismiss; DENYING 13 Motion to Dismiss; GRANTING the plaintiffs fourteen (14) days to file an amended complaint addressing the deficiencies in any dismissed claim. (Michel, G)
August 8, 2014
PDF | More
ORDER denying without prejudice 20 Motion for Protective Order signed by Magistrate Judge Allison Claire on 8/7/14. (Kaminski, H)
October 15, 2014
PDF | More
ORDER GRANTING ENTITY DEFENDANTS' MOTION TO DISMISS signed by Judge Garland E. Burrell, Jr on 10/14/14. Plaintiffs are granted fourteen (14) days from the date on which this order is filed to file an amended complaint addressing the referenced deficiencies in the dismissed claims.(Mena-Sanchez, L)
October 15, 2014
PDF | More
STIPULATION and ORDER 44 regarding production of person records signed by Magistrate Judge Allison Claire on 10/14/2014. Plaintiffs' counsel hereby agrees that no disclosure of designated materials will occur until either: (a) defense counsel informs them in a timely manner that no protective order will be sought, or (b) a ruling is made on Defendants' 40 Motion for Protective Order. Accordingly, defendants WITHDREW their 40 Motion. (Marciel, M)
January 9, 2015
PDF | More
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Allison Claire on 1/9/15: 50 Motion to Compel is GRANTED, to the extent that it seeks to compel the production of documents and further deposition testimony, and DENIED to the extent it seeks sanctions. Plaintiffs' request for a verification from defendants is DENIED. Defendants' 58 Motion for Protective Order is DENIED, without prejudice to renewal as to individual documents or specific information contained in individual documents. (Meuleman, A)
March 16, 2015
PDF | More
ORDER to SHOW CAUSE signed by Magistrate Judge Allison Claire on 3/16/2015. Defendants' 63 Motion to Quash Subpoena is DENIED in its entirety. Manteca and Bratton are ORDERED to comply with Subpoena. However, Manteca's compliance will be excused if Bratton meets compliance obligation instead. Defendant Bratton is ORDERED TO SHOW CAUSE, in writing, no later than 2 weeks from date of Order why Court should not order him to pay plaintiffs' attorney's fees, pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 37(a)(5)(A), to reimburse plaintiffs for having to bring this Motion, or a Statement of Non-Opposition to plaintiffs' Request for fees. Plaintiffs shall, no later than 30 days from date of this Order, submit a Declaration setting forth their attorney's fees incurred on this Motion. If plaintiffs seek sanctions beyond those authorized by Fed. R. Civ. P. 37(a)(5)(A), they must file a separate Motion for them. (Marciel, M)
May 20, 2015
PDF | More
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Allison Claire on 5/19/15 ORDERING that plaintiff is GRANTED $15,435.00 in attorney's fees. Within 14 days from the date of this order, defendant Bratton's counsel shall pay to plaintiff's counsel $15,435.00. Within 14 days from the date of this order, defendant's counsel shall serve and file a sworn affidavit or declaration stating that the above payment has been made, and that it was not billed to any defendant. (Kastilahn, A)
June 5, 2015
PDF | More
STIPULATION and PROTECTIVE ORDER REGARDING PRODUCTION OF CONFIDENTIAL RECORDS signed by Magistrate Judge Allison Claire on 6/4/15 re: 77. (Meuleman, A) Modified on 6/5/2015 (Meuleman, A).
June 5, 2015
PDF | More
STIPULATION and PROTECTIVE ORDER REGARDING PRODUCTION OF TELEPHONE RECORDS signed by Magistrate Judge Allison Claire on 6/4/15 re: 80. (Meuleman, A)
June 17, 2015
PDF | More
ORDER signed by Judge Garland E. Burrell, Jr on 6/16/15 ORDERING the Officer Defendants' motion to dismiss Plaintiff's Fourth Amendment provocation claim (Second Claim) is GRANTED. However, Plaintiff is granted fourteen (14) days leave from the date on which this order is filed to file a Third Amended Complaint addressing the referenced deficiencies in the Fourth Amendment provocation claim. (Becknal, R)
June 18, 2015
PDF | More
AMENDED ORDER signed by Judge Garland E. Burrell, Jr on 6/18/15 amending 86 Order on Motion to Dismiss. (Manzer, C)
September 3, 2015
PDF | More
ORDER signed by Judge Garland E. Burrell, Jr. on 9/2/2015 ORDERING Defendant's 79 reconsideration motion and his alternative request for a reduction of the attorney's fees awarded by the Magistrate Judge are DENIED. Plaintiff's request for additional attorney's fees incurred in opposing Defendant's reconsideration motion is GRANTED in part. Further, Defendant shall pay Plaintiff $675 within ten days from the date on which this Order is filed. (Zignago, K.)
September 16, 2015
PDF | More
ORDER signed by Judge Garland E. Burrell, Jr. on 9/15/2015 DENYING 89 Motion to Dismiss. (Michel, G.)
September 21, 2015
PDF | More
ORDER signed by Judge Garland E. Burrell, Jr. on 9/18/2015 GRANTING Plaintiffs' 91 motion to strike; Defendants have 14 days leave from the date on which this order is filed to file an amended answer addressing any affirmative defense. (Reader, L)
November 13, 2015
PDF | More
ORDER signed by Judge Garland E. Burrell, Jr on 11/12/15: 104 Clerk's Entry of Default is set aside and defendant Miles Scott Bratton shall file an Answer to the Third Amended Complaint on or before November 23, 2015. (Kaminski, H)
November 25, 2015
PDF | More
ORDER signed by Judge Garland E. Burrell, Jr on 11/25/2015 REFERRING 110, 111, 112 and 121 Motions seeking sanctions to the Assigned Magistrate Judge pursuant to Local Rules. The remaining portions of each motion is DENIED under the ripeness doctrine. (Donati, J)
January 8, 2016
PDF | More
nchez, L)ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFFS' MOTION TO STRIKE EXPERT WITNESSES signed by Magistrate Judge Allison Claire on 1/7/16. Plaintiffs' MOTIONS to Exclude Expert Winesses and for Sanctions 110, 111, 112, 121, 136, 137 are DENIED. (Mena-Sa
January 14, 2016
PDF | More
ORDER signed by District Judge Troy L. Nunley on 1/13/16 granting 152 APPLICATION. (Kaminski, H)
January 28, 2016
PDF | More
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Allison Claire on 1/27/16 ORDERING that Plaintiffs' Motion To Compel (ECF No. 149) is GRANTED; Plaintiffs shall serve this order on AT&T Mobility; and AT&T Mobility is ORDERED to produce the requested information to plaintiffs within seven (7) calendar days of being served with this order. (Becknal, R)
February 17, 2016
PDF | More
ORDER signed by District Judge Troy L. Nunley on 02/16/16 GRANTING IN PART and DENYING IN PART 138 Motion to Strike. The Court DENIES Plaintiffs' motion to strike Officer Defendants' first, second, fourth, sixth, seventh, eighth, and tenth affirmative defenses. The Court STRIKES WITHOUT LEAVE TO AMEND Officer Defendants' third and ninth affirmative defenses. As for Officer Defendants' fifth affirmative defense, the Court STRIKES WITHOUT LEAVE TO AMEND this defense as to Plaintiff Sukhwinder Kaur's Fourth Amendment excessive force claim, and DENIES Plaintiffs' motion to strike the fifth affirmative defense as to Plaintiffs' remaining claims against Officer Defendants. (Jackson, T)
February 17, 2016
PDF | More
ORDER signed by District Judge Troy L. Nunley on 02/16/16 GRANTING IN PART and DENYING IN PART 108 Motion to Strike. The Court DENIES Plaintiffs' motion to strike the second, third, fourth, fifth, sixth, seventh, and tenth affirmative defenses. The Court STRIKES WITHOUT LEAVE TO AMEND the eighth affirmative defense. As for the first affirmative defense, the Court STRIKES WITHOUT LEAVE TO AMEND the first affirmative defense asserted by City of Lodi and Lodi Police Department, and DENIES Plaintiffs' motion to strike the first affirmative defense asserted by Helms. (Jackson, T)
May 26, 2016
PDF | More
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Allison Claire on 5/26/2016 ORDERING that plaintiff's 194 Motion for Sanctions is DENIED without prejudice to its renewal as an in limine motion. (Zignago, K.)
June 30, 2017
PDF | More
ORDER signed by District Judge Troy L. Nunley on 6/29/17 ORDERING for the foregoing reasons, the Officer Defendants' 164 motion is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. GRANTED with respect to: (i) the Second Claim and (ii) the Eleventh Claim. Otherwise, it is DENIED; the City Defendants' 163 motion is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part; GRANTED with respect to: (i) the Sixth Claim, as it applies to Chief Helms in his individual capacity, (ii) the Seventh Claim, and (iii) the Eleventh Claim. Otherwise, the City Defendants' motion is DENIED. (Becknal, R) Modified on 7/5/2017 (Krueger, M).