2:26-cv-04570 LOPEZ v. COSTCO WHOLESALE CORPORATION et al
Proof of Service (subsequent documents) ( 5
Aguirre v. H&M Fashion USA, Inc. is a case filed in the Central District of California. The case was filed on an unspecified date and has a docket number of 26-cv-04570. The current summary of the case is that a proof of service was filed, indicating that the defendant has been served with the complaint. This is a subsequent document in the case, suggesting that the case is ongoing.
No timeline activity recorded yet. This page will grow as rulings and filings land.
Court
C.D. Cal.
Central District of California · 9th Circuit · CA
Docket
Not captured
Civil
Stage
Active litigation
Active
Filed
Date unavailable
Not in the available feed
Latest Filing
2:26-cv-04570 LOPEZ v. COSTCO WHOLESALE CORPORATION et al
Other · Apr 29, 2026
Coverage
3 articles
3 sources tracked
Participants
2 Defendants, 1 Plaintiff
6 linked entities
Judge
Not assigned in feed
This case is tied to Central District of California, a federal district court in CA.
The newest docket activity we have is a other dated April 29, 2026.
The visible party/entity graph currently includes H&M Fashion USA, Inc, COSTCO WHOLESALE CORPORATION, 3:26-cv-04570 SOLIS ACOSTA and others.
Press monitoring has found 3 related articles from 3 distinct sources.
Aguirre v. H&M Fashion USA, Inc. is an active civil matter in Central District of California under docket 26-cv-04570.
The dispute currently identifies 3:26-cv-04570 SOLIS ACOSTA on one side and COSTCO WHOLESALE CORPORATION and H&M Fashion USA, Inc on the other. The case is currently organized around Current docket activity and next procedural step, Settlement posture and dismissal risk, Federal jurisdiction and procedural posture, Contract interpretation and performance obligations.
The available docket gives enough signal to track the case, but not enough to overstate the merits. This page will become more useful as filings, orders, hearings, and party appearances add detail.
On April 29, 2026, the docket recorded a other: The court has been notified that a subsequent document has been served in the case of Lopez v. Costco Wholesale Corporation et al. This document is related to the case Aguirre v. The proof of service indicates that the document has been. On April 26, 2026, the docket recorded a other: The court added Judge Solis Acosta to the case Aguirre v. and terminated Judge Blanche.
This change in judges may impact the case's progress and outcome. On April 22, 2026, the docket recorded a other: The court granted a motion to seal certain documents in the Aguirre v. case, citing concerns about the potential harm to the parties involved.
The sealed documents are related to a settlement agreement between the plaintiff and the.
The next thing to watch is whether the latest other produces a substantive order, a scheduling change, a settlement signal, or a filing that clarifies the parties' positions.
Central District of California (C.D. Cal.) is a federal district court in the 9th Circuit, CA.
The court has been notified that a subsequent document has been served in the case of Lopez v. Costco Wholesale Corporation et al. This document is related to the case Aguirre v. H&M Fashion USA, Inc. The proof of service indicates that the document has been delivered to the relevant parties.
The court added Judge Solis Acosta to the case Aguirre v. H&M Fashion USA, Inc. and terminated Judge Blanche. This change in judges may impact the case's progress and outcome.
The court granted a motion to seal certain documents in the Aguirre v. H&M Fashion USA, Inc. case, citing concerns about the potential harm to the parties involved. The sealed documents are related to a settlement agreement between the plaintiff and the defendant. This decision allows the parties to maintain confidentiality in their settlement negotiations.
Proof of Service (subsequent documents) ( 5
Add and Terminate Judges
Sources tracked
3 outlets · 3 articles
Timeline events
3 records on file
Last updated
1 day, 8 hours ago
Juryvine aggregates docket entries from PACER/CourtListener, press coverage, and GDELT signals. Ingestion timestamps do not appear in the What Changed feed — that reflects real court activity only.