Cameron Rayburn v. Ability Recovery Services, LLC et al
Cameron Rayburn |
Ability Recovery Services, LLC and Ashworth College |
2:2018cv07638 |
August 31, 2018 |
US District Court for the Central District of California |
Steve Kim |
Manuel L Real |
Consumer Credit |
15 U.S.C. ยง 1692 |
Plaintiff |
Docket Report
This docket was last retrieved on October 24, 2018. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
Document Text |
---|
![]() |
Filing 16 STIPULATION to Dismiss Case pursuant to FRCP 41(a)(1) filed by Plaintiff Cameron Rayburn. (Attachments: #1 Proposed Order)(Brazier, Brian) |
![]() |
![]() |
Filing 13 NOTICE OF REASSIGNMENT of MJDAP case from Magistrate Judge Michael R. Wilner to Judge Manuel L. Real for all further proceedings. Any discovery matters that may be referred to a Magistrate Judge are assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Steve Kim. The case number will now reflect the initials of the transferee Judges 2:18-cv-07638 R(SKx). (rn) |
Filing 12 DECLINED STATEMENT OF CONSENT TO PROCEED before the assigned Magistrate Judge filed by Plaintiff Cameron Rayburn. (Brazier, Brian) |
Filing 11 PROOF OF SERVICE Executed by Plaintiff Cameron Rayburn, upon Defendant Ability Recovery Services, LLC served on 9/18/2018, answer due 10/9/2018. Service of the Summons and Complaint were executed upon Maureen Lynott, Compliance Officer in compliance with Federal Rules of Civil Procedure by service on a domestic corporation, unincorporated association, or public entity.Original Summons NOT returned. (Brazier, Brian) |
Filing 10 REMINDER NOTICE re Magistrate Judge Direct Assignment Program. Each party must file form CV-11C within the consent deadlines pursuant to L.R. 73-2. Additionally, the parties are directed to L.R. 73-2.2 Proof of Service. In any case in which only a magistrate judge is initially assigned, plaintiff must file a proof of service within 10 days of service of the summons and complaint as to each defendant. (vm) |
Filing 9 PROOF OF SERVICE Executed by Plaintiff Cameron Rayburn, upon Defendant Ashworth College served on 9/6/2018, answer due 9/27/2018. Service of the Summons and Complaint were executed upon Melissa Maddox, designated by law to accept service in compliance with Federal Rules of Civil Procedure by service on a domestic corporation, unincorporated association, or public entity.Original Summons NOT returned. (Brazier, Brian) |
Filing 8 21 DAY Summons issued re Complaint #1 as to defendant Ashworth College. (esa) |
Filing 7 21 DAY Summons issued re Complaint #1 as to defendant Ability Recovery Services, LLC. (esa) |
Filing 6 NOTICE TO COUNSEL re Magistrate Judge Direct Assignment Program. This case has been randomly assigned to Magistrate Judge Michael R. Wilner. (Attachments: #1 CV-11C) (esa) |
Filing 5 Request for Clerk to Issue Summons on Civil Cover Sheet (CV-71) #2 , Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening) #1 , Certificate/Notice of Interested Parties #3 filed by Plaintiff Cameron Rayburn. (Brazier, Brian) |
Filing 4 Request for Clerk to Issue Summons on Civil Cover Sheet (CV-71) #2 , Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening) #1 , Certificate/Notice of Interested Parties #3 filed by Plaintiff Cameron Rayburn. (Brazier, Brian) |
Filing 3 NOTICE of Interested Parties filed by Plaintiff Cameron Rayburn, (Brazier, Brian) |
Filing 2 CIVIL COVER SHEET filed by Plaintiff Cameron Rayburn. (Brazier, Brian) |
Filing 1 COMPLAINT Receipt No: 0973-22350834 - Fee: $400, filed by Plaintiff Cameron Rayburn. (Attorney Brian James Brazier added to party Cameron Rayburn(pty:pla))(Brazier, Brian) |
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 Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
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.