DecisionDepot
California legal research
All cases
26CV-00012·merced·Civil·Case Management
Hearing in about 4 hoursDENIED

Bruce Austin vs Infinity Management and Investments, LLC, et al.

Motion to Advance and Re-Set Case Management Conference; and for Relief from Non-Appearance

Hearing date
Sep 8, 2026
Department
Courtroom 12
Prevailing
Defendant

Motion type

Browse all Other rulings statewide →

Parties

PlaintiffBruce Austin
DefendantInfinity Management and Investments, LLC

Ruling

Civil Law & Motion/ Petition Name Change Hon. Jennifer O Trimble Courtroom 12

1159 G Street, Los Banos

Tuesday, September 08, 2026 1:30 p.m.

The following tentative rulings shall become the ruling of the court unless a party gives notice of intention to appear as follows: 1. You must call (209) 725-4240 to notify the court of your intent to appear.

2. You must give notice to all other parties before 4:00 p.m. of your intent to appear. Per California Rules of Court, rule 3.1308(a)(1), failure to do both items 1 and 2 will result in no oral argument. Note: Notifying CourtCall (the court’s telephonic appearance provider) of your intent to appear does not satisfy the requirement of notifying the court.

Case No. Title / Description

26CV-00012 Bruce Austin vs Infinity Management and Investments, LLC, et al.

Motion to Advance and Re-Set Case Management Conference; and for Relief from Non- Appearance

Plaintiff’s motion to advance and reset the case management conference and for relief from non-appearance is DENIED.

All case management conferences are set in Courtroom 8 and the hearing dates are set by the court based on the court’s calendar.

The request for relief from non-appearance is denied as moot. The court did not issue an OSC for the non-appearance. Therefore, there is no need for relief.

The request for all future notices by the court to be served by both U.S. mail and electronic service is denied. Plaintiff is only entitled to one form of service by the court. Electronic service is a substitute for mail service and not a supplement. Plaintiff does have the right to request electronic service in place of mail service, but must file with the court form EFS-005-CV or a substantially similar document.

Cited authorities

Extracting citations from the ruling text…
Verify against the source PDF — LLM extraction may miss or mis-normalize citations.

Looking for case law or statutes not cited here? Search published authorities

Ask about this ruling

Examples: “Why did the court rule this way?” · “What were the procedural grounds?” · “Is appearance required?”

Answers reference only this ruling's text. Not legal advice — always verify against the source PDF.

Find similar rulings

Source

Share