Alan S. Gutman v. Citigroup et al
| Alan S. Gutman Law and Alan S. Gutman |
| Citibank USA, Citicorp, Citibank Services Inc, Citigroup, North Dakota Bankers Association, CitiBank N.A., South Dakota, Citibank (South Dakota), N.A. and Does 1-25 |
| 2:2021cv05377 |
| July 1, 2021 |
| US District Court for the Central District of California |
| John E McDermott |
| Consumer Credit |
| 15 U.S.C. ยง 1681 |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on August 17, 2021. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 11
ORDER ON STIPULATION OF DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE PURSUANT TO FED. R. CIV. P. 41 #10 by Magistrate Judge John E. McDermott, the Stipulation is GRANTED. The claims asserted by Plaintiff Alan S. Gutman in this matter ARE DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE and with each party to bear their own costs and fees. Case Terminated. Made JS-6. (es)
|
| Filing 10 STIPULATION to Dismiss Case pursuant to WITH PREJUDICE PURSUANT TO FED. R. CIV. P. 41 filed by Defendants Citibank (South Dakota), N.A., Citibank Services Inc, Citibank USA, Citicorp, Citigroup, North Dakota Bankers Association. (Attachments: #1 Proposed Order)(Attorney Marcos Daniel Sasso added to party Citibank (South Dakota), N.A.(pty:dft), Attorney Marcos Daniel Sasso added to party Citibank Services Inc(pty:dft), Attorney Marcos Daniel Sasso added to party Citibank USA(pty:dft), Attorney Marcos Daniel Sasso added to party Citicorp(pty:dft), Attorney Marcos Daniel Sasso added to party Citigroup(pty:dft), Attorney Marcos Daniel Sasso added to party North Dakota Bankers Association(pty:dft))(Sasso, Marcos) |
| Filing 9 21 DAY Summons Issued re Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening) #1 as to Defendant Citibank (South Dakota), N.A., Citibank Services Inc, Citibank USA, Citicorp, Citigroup, North Dakota Bankers Association. (es) |
| Filing 8 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. [See Notice for details.] (san) |
| Filing 7 Request for Clerk to Issue Summons on Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening) #1 filed by Plaintiff Alan S. Gutman. (Gutman, Alan) |
| Filing 6 NOTICE OF DEFICIENCIES in Request to Issue Summons. The following error(s) was found: Summons is not directed to the defendant(s). The defendants name must appear in the To:section of the summons. The summons cannot be issued until this defect has been corrected. Please correct the defect and re-file your request. (esa) |
| Filing 5 NOTICE TO COUNSEL re Magistrate Judge Direct Assignment Program. This case has been randomly assigned to Magistrate Judge John E. McDermott. (Attachments: #1 CV11C) (esa) |
| Filing 4 Request for Clerk to Issue Summons on Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening) #1 filed by Plaintiff Alan S. Gutman Law. (Gutman, Alan) |
| Filing 3 CIVIL COVER SHEET filed by Plaintiff Alan S. Gutman Law. (Gutman, Alan) |
| Filing 2 CERTIFICATE of Interested Parties filed by Plaintiff Alan S. Gutman Law, (Gutman, Alan) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT Receipt No: ACACDC-31567343 - Fee: $402, filed by Plaintiff Alan S. Gutman Law. (Attorney Alan S Gutman added to party Alan S. Gutman Law(pty:pla))(Gutman, Alan) |
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.
