8:26-cv-00800 Samantha Harris v. Pei Wei Asian Diner, LLC
Extending Time to Answer (30 days or less) ( 8
The court granted an extension to Pei Wei Asian Diner, LLC to respond to the complaint in the Shenzhen Ankou Technology Co Ltd v. Kaz Europe Sarl case. This extension allows Pei Wei Asian Diner, LLC to have more time to prepare its response. The extension was granted for 30 days or less.
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
8:26-cv-00800 Samantha Harris v. Pei Wei Asian Diner, LLC
Other · May 05, 2026
Coverage
4 articles
2 sources tracked
Participants
3 Defendants, 4 Plaintiffs, 1 Related Organization
9 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 May 05, 2026.
The visible party/entity graph currently includes Pei Wei Asian Diner, LLC, Kaz Europe Sarl, Todd M. Lyons and others.
Press monitoring has found 4 related articles from 2 distinct sources.
Shenzhen Ankou Technology Co Ltd Sues Kaz Europe Sarl is an active civil matter in Central District of California under docket 26-cv-00800.
The dispute currently identifies 2:26-cv-00800 Colton Bryant, 2:26-cv-00800 Shenzhen Ankou Technology Co Ltd, and 5:26-cv-00800 Kharon Gardaloev on one side and Kaz Europe Sarl, Pei Wei Asian Diner, LLC, and Todd M. Lyons on the other. The case is currently organized around Shenzhen Ankou Technology Co Ltd, Kaz Europe Sarl, federal 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 5, 2026, the docket recorded a other: The court granted an extension to Pei Wei Asian Diner, LLC to respond to the complaint in the Shenzhen Ankou Technology Co Ltd v. Kaz Europe Sarl case. This extension allows Pei Wei Asian Diner, LLC to have more time to prepare its response.
The extension was. On April 30, 2026, the docket recorded a other: The parties reported a settlement. On April 30, 2026, the docket recorded a other: The court has scheduled a hearing for the case Shenzhen Ankou Technology Co Ltd Sues Kaz Europe Sarl, which is related to the case 5:26-cv-00800 Kharon Gardaloev et al v. Todd M. Lyons et al. This hearing will likely address the ongoing dispute between the.
On April 24, 2026, the docket recorded a other: Shenzhen Ankou Technology Co Ltd filed a notice in the case 2:26-cv-00800 Shenzhen Ankou Technology Co Ltd v. Kaz Europe Sarl. The notice is a procedural filing that does not provide details on the case's merits.
This filing is a routine step in 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 granted an extension to Pei Wei Asian Diner, LLC to respond to the complaint in the Shenzhen Ankou Technology Co Ltd v. Kaz Europe Sarl case. This extension allows Pei Wei Asian Diner, LLC to have more time to prepare its response. The extension was granted for 30 days or less.
The parties reported a settlement.
The court has scheduled a hearing for the case Shenzhen Ankou Technology Co Ltd Sues Kaz Europe Sarl, which is related to the case 5:26-cv-00800 Kharon Gardaloev et al v. Todd M. Lyons et al. This hearing will likely address the ongoing dispute between the parties. The outcome of this hearing will have a significant impact on the case.
Shenzhen Ankou Technology Co Ltd filed a notice in the case 2:26-cv-00800 Shenzhen Ankou Technology Co Ltd v. Kaz Europe Sarl. The notice is a procedural filing that does not provide details on the case's merits. This filing is a routine step in the litigation process.
Extending Time to Answer (30 days or less) ( 8
Notice-Other ( 5
Sources tracked
2 outlets · 4 articles
Timeline events
4 records on file
Last updated
1 hour, 31 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.