Cantu v. PHH Mortgage Services
Rogers Cantu |
PHH Mortgage Services |
2:2024cv00974 |
April 30, 2024 |
US District Court for the District of Arizona |
Dominic W Lanza |
Real Property: Other |
28 U.S.C. ยง 1331 Fed. Question: Breach of Contract |
Plaintiff |
Docket Report
This docket was last retrieved on June 26, 2024. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
Document Text |
---|
Filing 10 CLERK'S JUDGMENT - pursuant to the Court's Order filed 6/26/2024, judgment of dismissal is entered. Plaintiff to take nothing, and the complaint and action are dismissed. (KJ) |
Filing 9 ORDER: Defendant's motion to dismiss (Doc. #6 ) is granted. The complaint is dismissed without leave to amend. The Clerk shall enter judgment accordingly and terminate this action. Signed by Judge Dominic W Lanza on 6/25/2024. (KJ) |
Filing 7 REQUEST re: for Judicial Notice in Support of Defendant's Motion to Dismiss by Defendant PHH Mortgage Services. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit 1)(Norman, Robert) |
Filing 6 MOTION to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim by PHH Mortgage Services. (Norman, Robert) |
Filing 8 SERVICE EXECUTED filed by Rogers Cantu: Affidavit of Service re: Summons, Complaint upon PHH Mortgage Services on 5/16/2024. (KJ) |
Filing 5 REQUEST BY NON-PRISONER PRO SE PARTY FOR ELECTRONIC NOTICING filed by Rogers Cantu. Pro se parties must promptly notify the Clerks Office, in writing, if there is a change in designated e-mail address or mailing address. (BAS) |
Filing 4 PRELIMINARY ORDER - IT IS ORDERED: 1. That Plaintiff(s) must promptly serve a copy of this Order on Defendant(s) and file a notice of service with the Clerk of Court; 2. That, unless the Court orders otherwise, on July 30, 2024, the Clerk of Court shall terminate without further notice any Defendant in this action that has not been served pursuant to Rule 4(m) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. (See document for complete details). Signed by Judge Dominic W Lanza on 5/2/24. (SLQ) |
Filing 3 NOTICE TO SELF-REPRESENTED LITIGANT re informational documents attached: (1) Notice to Self-Represented Litigant, (2) Federal Court Self-Service Clinic Flyer, (3) Fed. R. Civ. P. 5.2, and (4) Notice and Request re Electronic Noticing. (BAS) |
Filing 2 Filing fee paid, receipt number 200011802. This case has been assigned to the Honorable Dominic W. Lanza. All future pleadings or documents should bear the correct case number: CV24-00974-PHX-DWL. Notice of Availability of Magistrate Judge to Exercise Jurisdiction form attached. (BAS) |
Filing 1 COMPLAINT. Filing fee received: $ 405.00, receipt number 200011802 filed by Rogers Cantu.(BAS) |
Access additional case information on PACER
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the Arizona District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
Search for this case: Cantu v. PHH Mortgage Services | |
---|---|
Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
Plaintiff: Rogers Cantu | |
Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
Search Finance | [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ] |
Search Web | [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
Defendant: PHH Mortgage Services | |
Represented By: | Robert Wayne Norman, Jr. |
Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
Search Finance | [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ] |
Search Web | [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.