Mgngistu Ngway v. Certegy Payment Recovery Services, Inc.
Plaintiff: Mgngistu Ngway
Defendant: Certegy Payment Recovery Services, Inc.
Case Number: 2:2010cv05385
Filed: July 21, 2010
Court: US District Court for the Central District of California
Presiding Judge: Rosalyn M. Chapman
Presiding Judge: Jacqueline H. Nguyen
Nature of Suit: Consumer Credit

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed Document Text
September 27, 2010 Opinion or Order Filing 10 ORDER DISMISSING CASE by Judge Jacqueline H. Nguyen. Plaintiff was given leave to file an amended complaint no later than September 22, 2010. No amended complaint having been field, this action is hereby DISMISSED. Case Terminated. Made JS-6. (rrey)
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 California Central District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Mgngistu Ngway v. Certegy Payment Recovery Services, Inc.
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Certegy Payment Recovery Services, Inc.
Represented By: Tomio B Narita
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 ]
Plaintiff: Mgngistu Ngway
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.


Why Is My Information Online?