Moshe Schwartz v. A.R.M Solutions, Inc.
| Moshe Schwartz |
| A.R.M Solutions, Inc. |
| 2:2021cv00306 |
| January 13, 2021 |
| US District Court for the Central District of California |
| Consuelo B Marshall |
| Michael R Wilner |
| George H Wu |
| Consumer Credit |
| 15 U.S.C. ยง 1692 |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on February 8, 2021. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 10 SERVICE UNDER FRCP 5(b)(2)(D) Executed by Plaintiff Moshe Schwartz, upon Defendant A.R.M Solutions, Inc. served on 2/2/2021, answer due 2/23/2021. Service of the Summons and Complaint were executed upon the Clerks Office in compliance with Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. (Sanders, Craig) |
Filing 9
STANDING ORDER RE FINAL PRE-TRIAL CONFERENCES FOR CIVIL JURY TRIALS BEFORE JUDGE GEORGE H. WU by Judge George H. Wu. (See document for details) (mrgo)
|
|
Filing 8
ORDER RETURNING CASE FOR REASSIGNMENT by Judge Consuelo B. Marshall. ORDER case returned to the Clerk for random reassignment pursuant to General Order 19-03. Case randomly reassigned from Judge Consuelo B. Marshall to Judge George H. Wu for all further proceedings. The case number will now reflect the initials of the transferee Judge 2:21-cv-00306 GW(MRWx). (rn)
|
| Filing 7 NOTICE of Interested Parties filed by Plaintiff Moshe Schwartz, identifying Counsel for Plaintiff. (Sanders, Craig) |
| Filing 6 NOTICE OF DEFICIENCIES in Attorney Case Opening RE: Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening) #1 . The following error(s) was found: No Notice of Interested Parties has been filed. A Notice of Interested Parties must be filed with every partys first appearance. See Local Rule 7.1-1. Counsel must file a Notice of Interested Parties immediately. Failure to do so may be addressed by judicial action, including sanctions. See Local Rule 83-7. (car) |
| Filing 5 21 DAY Summons Issued re Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening) #1 as to Defendant A.R.M Solutions, Inc. (car) |
| Filing 4 NOTICE OF ASSIGNMENT to District Judge Consuelo B. Marshall and Magistrate Judge Michael R. Wilner. (car) |
| Filing 3 Request for Clerk to Issue Summons on Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening) #1 filed by Plaintiff Moshe Schwartz. (Sanders, Craig) |
| Filing 2 CIVIL COVER SHEET filed by Plaintiff Moshe Schwartz. (Sanders, Craig) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT Receipt No: ACACDC-30017907 - Fee: $402, filed by Plaintiff Moshe Schwartz. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit) (Attorney Craig B Sanders added to party Moshe Schwartz(pty:pla))(Sanders, Craig) |
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
| Search for this case: Moshe Schwartz v. A.R.M Solutions, Inc. | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Defendant: A.R.M Solutions, Inc. | |
| 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: Moshe Schwartz | |
| Represented By: | Craig B Sanders |
| 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.
