Matthew Khair v. Citibank, N.A. et al
| Matthew Khair |
| CitiBank N A and Does 1 through 10 inclusive |
| 2:2022cv07983 |
| November 2, 2022 |
| US District Court for the Central District of California |
| Michael R Wilner |
| Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) |
| 47 U.S.C. ยง 227 Restrictions of Use of Telephone Equipment |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on February 10, 2023. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 3 NOTICE OF DEFICIENCIES in Request to Issue Summons RE: Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening), #1 . The following error(s) was found: The name and address of the attorney for plaintiff(s)must be entered in the appropriate field. The summons cannot be issued until this defect has been corrected. Please correct the defect and re-file your request. (ghap) |
| Filing 2 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 Statement of Consent to Proceed Before a United States Magistrate Judge) (ghap) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT Receipt No: ACACDC-34257756 - Fee: $402, filed by Plaintiff Matthew Khair. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet, #2 SUMMONS REQUEST-FILED as Supplement) (Attorney Lee Paul Mankin, IV added to party Matthew Khair(pty:bkmov))(Mankin, Lee) Modified on 11/2/2022 (ghap). |
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.
