newspaper
2:25-cv-11942 Miriam Maldonado v. Ben Bautista and Associates, Inc. et al
Dismissing Case ( 22
Apr 22, 2026
1 min read
civil-litigation
federal-courts
court-watch
Miriam Maldonado v. Ben Bautista and Associates, Inc. et al: Case Dismissed
25-cv-11942
C.D. Cal.
Advertisement
description
Case Summary
Miriam Maldonado v. Ben Bautista and Associates, Inc. et al was dismissed due to a lack of progress or further action. The dismissal suggests that the plaintiff was unable to move forward with the case or that the defendant was successful in defending against the claims. The case was assigned docket number 25-cv-11942.
No timeline activity recorded yet. This page will grow as rulings and filings land.
Key Issues
- • Case Dismissal
- • Lack of Progress
- • Further Action
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
2:25-cv-11942 TOMLINSON v. RYDER RELOCATIONS LLC et al
Other · May 11, 2026
newspaper
Coverage
1 article
1 source tracked
groups
Participants
2 Defendants, 1 Plaintiff
3 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 11, 2026.
The visible party/entity graph currently includes Ben Bautista and Associates, Inc, RYDER RELOCATIONS LLC, Miriam Maldonado.
Press monitoring has found 1 related article from 1 distinct source.
chronic
Updated 4 days, 23 hours ago
The Story So Far
Miriam Maldonado v. Ben Bautista and Associates, Inc. et al: Case Dismissed is an active civil matter in Central District of California under docket 25-cv-11942.
The dispute currently identifies 2:25-cv-11942 Miriam Maldonado on one side and Ben Bautista and Associates, Inc on the other. The case is currently organized around Case Dismissal, Lack of Progress, Further Action.
et al was dismissed due to a lack of progress or further action. The dismissal suggests that the plaintiff was unable to move forward with the case or that the defendant was successful in defending against the claims. The case was assigned docket number 25-cv-11942.
On April 22, 2026, the docket recorded a other: The court dismissed the case Miriam Maldonado v. et al (2:25-cv-11942) due to a lack of activity or progress. This means the lawsuit is no longer active and will not proceed.
The dismissal does not necessarily mean 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.
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
2 events
info
Other
May 11, 2026
2:25-cv-11942 TOMLINSON v. RYDER RELOCATIONS LLC et al
The court dismissed the case of Miriam Maldonado v. Ben Bautista and Associates, Inc. et al. This means the lawsuit will not proceed further, ending the dispute in this court. Parties involved will no longer have to engage in litigation over this matter.
info
Other
April 22, 2026
2:25-cv-11942 Miriam Maldonado v. Ben Bautista and Associates, Inc. et al
The court dismissed the case Miriam Maldonado v. Ben Bautista and Associates, Inc. et al (2:25-cv-11942) due to a lack of activity or progress. This means the lawsuit is no longer active and will not proceed. The dismissal does not necessarily mean the plaintiff's claims were invalid.
Advertisement
newspaper
1 article
Press Coverage
settings_backup_restore Data provenance expand_more
Sources tracked
1 outlet · 1 article
Timeline events
2 records on file
Last updated
4 days, 23 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.