civil-litigation federal-courts court-watch

Pro se litigant files notice of resources in Central District civil case against Intercontinental Hotels

26-cv-04611 C.D. Cal.
Active Active litigation Sign in to follow this case
Share mail
Advertisement
description

Case Summary

This civil case, (K.R.D.), an Individual v. Intercontinental Hotels Group PLC et al, is proceeding in the Central District of California. A notice regarding resources for pro se litigants has been filed. This indicates at least one party is representing themselves without legal counsel.

No timeline activity recorded yet. This page will grow as rulings and filings land.

Key Issues

  • Pro se litigant
  • Litigant resources
smart_toy Juryvine case summary generated from primary court records. How we verify our work.
fact_check

Docket Snapshot

account_balance

Court

C.D. Cal.

Central District of California · 9th Circuit · CA

tag

Docket

Not captured

Civil

timeline

Stage

Active litigation

Active

event

Filed

Date unavailable

Not in the available feed

new_releases

Latest Filing

2:26-cv-04611 George Alexander Lugo v. Stovall et al

Other · May 04, 2026

newspaper

Coverage

3 articles

3 sources tracked

groups

Participants

2 Defendants, 2 Plaintiffs, 1 Related Organization

7 linked entities

gavel

Judge

Not assigned in feed

What the record shows

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 May 04, 2026.

The visible party/entity graph currently includes Intercontinental Hotels Group PLC, JOHNSON & JOHNSON, 1:26-cv-04611 (K.R.D.), an Individual and others.

Press monitoring has found 3 related articles from 3 distinct sources.

chronic

The Story So Far

Updated 1 day, 23 hours ago

(K.R.D.), an Individual v. Intercontinental Hotels Group PLC et al is an active civil matter in Central District of California under docket 26-cv-04611.

The dispute currently identifies 1:26-cv-04611 (K.R.D.), an Individual and 2:26-cv-04611 George Alexander Lugo on one side and Intercontinental Hotels Group PLC and JOHNSON & JOHNSON on the other. The case is currently organized around unknown court.

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 May 4, 2026, the docket recorded a other: A Notice of Resources for ProSe Litigants was filed. On April 27, 2026, the docket recorded a other: The court has denied a motion in the case of Maier et al v. Johnson & Johnson et al, which is a separate lawsuit from K.R.D.

v. Intercontinental Hotels Group PLC et al. This motion was likely related to the ongoing litigation, but the specifics are not.

On April 23, 2026, the docket recorded a other: The court denied a motion in the case of K.R.D. Intercontinental Hotels Group PLC, which means the plaintiff's request for a specific action was rejected. This decision is significant because it will impact the progression of the case.

The court's ruling.

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.

smart_toy Juryvine case narrative generated from the full docket timeline. How we verify our work.

About This Court

Central District of California (C.D. Cal.) is a federal district court in the 9th Circuit, CA.

Advertisement

Case Timeline

3 events
info
Other May 4, 2026

2:26-cv-04611 George Alexander Lugo v. Stovall et al

A Notice of Resources for ProSe Litigants was filed.

info
Other April 27, 2026

3:26-cv-04611 MAIER et al v. JOHNSON & JOHNSON et al

The court has denied a motion in the case of Maier et al v. Johnson & Johnson et al, which is a separate lawsuit from K.R.D. v. Intercontinental Hotels Group PLC et al. This motion was likely related to the ongoing litigation, but the specifics are not provided. The denial of the motion means that the plaintiffs' claims will proceed as previously scheduled.

info
Other April 23, 2026

1:26-cv-04611 (K.R.D.), an Individual v. Intercontinental Hotels Group PLC et al

The court denied a motion in the case of K.R.D. v. Intercontinental Hotels Group PLC, which means the plaintiff's request for a specific action was rejected. This decision is significant because it will impact the progression of the case. The court's ruling will likely influence the plaintiff's next steps.

Advertisement
show_chart

Coverage Timeline

newspaper

Press Coverage

3 articles
settings_backup_restore Data provenance expand_more

Sources tracked

3 outlets · 3 articles

Timeline events

3 records on file

Last updated

5 hours, 8 minutes 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.