What court docket entries exist in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California regarding the Harvest/Havsgaard cases as of 2026?

1. What filings reporters say exist: initial complaints and subsequent suits

News organizations reported that at least two complaints were filed in the Central District of California by Romanian men Marian Barbu and Mihai‑Constantin Petcu alleging years of sexual abuse and trafficking by Paul Havsgaard at a Bucharest shelter, and those complaints are described as being filed in U.S. District Court in California ^{[1] [6]}. Subsequent reporting states more plaintiffs followed: additional lawsuits were filed on behalf of other Romanian men, and one outlet cited a later set of filings bringing the total of named plaintiffs in federal suits to a larger group (for example, 12 men in reporting by The Christian Post), all identified as being filed in the Central District of California ^{[2] [1]}.

2. What the public court portals show and what they do not show in the provided sources

The Central District of California publishes a docket and daily calendar and provides public access portals, and PACER is the official system for obtaining full federal dockets and filings—meaning the definitive list of docket entries for the Harvest/Havsgaard matters would be accessible there ^{[3] [4] [7]}. The aggregated legal databases like Justia and Pacermonitor index Central District cases and decisions but the excerpts supplied here do not include the specific docket numbers or a reproduced docket sheet for the Havsgaard-related filings ^{[5] [8] [9]}.

3. Allegations in the complaints as described by reporting

The reported complaints allege that Havsgaard abused wards of a Romanian shelter over multiple years and that church leaders had notice or failed to supervise him properly; one article quotes allegations about poor supervision, monthly transfers to Havsgaard’s account, and descriptive accounts from plaintiffs in the complaints ^{[1] [6]}. Harvest Christian Fellowship’s public response, as conveyed in reporting, rejected the broader targeting of the church and said the allegations were shocking and that the focus should be on the individual accused—an explicit institutional response reported alongside the filings ^[1].

4. Limitations of available sources and unanswered docket specifics

None of the provided sources reproduces the Central District docket sheet or gives complete docket numbers, filing dates, or the full sequence of pleadings and orders for each Harvest/Havsgaard case; therefore, a definitive, item‑by‑item docket inventory cannot be compiled from these materials alone and must be confirmed by consulting the court’s docket search or PACER directly ^{[3] [4] [5]}. The court’s daily calendar and courtroom listings are public (and were referenced in the court’s web documents cited here), but those pages do not substitute for a full electronic case filing history ^{[10] [11] [12]}.

5. How to verify the full docket and next reporting steps

To obtain the authoritative list of docket entries—including complaint filings, docket numbers, summations of motions, any orders, and appearances—use the Central District of California’s docket search or PACER’s case lookup (the court’s site and PACER are referenced by the sources) and consider using commercial aggregators like Justia or Pacermonitor for cross‑checks; the sources cited here identify those portals as the appropriate places to view live docket data ^{[3] [4] [8] [5]}. Reporting to date documents the existence of multiple civil complaints in that court tied to Havsgaard and lists named plaintiffs in those reports, but the precise docket entries, numbers, and procedural posture as of 2026 are not contained in the provided materials and therefore require direct docket queries to confirm ^{[2] [1]}.