Ralph Pickett Jr. v. Navient Solutions LLC
| Ralph Pickett Jr. |
| Navient Solutions LLC and Does 1 to 8 |
| 2:2023cv06497 |
| August 9, 2023 |
| US District Court for the Central District of California |
| Western Division - Los Angeles Office |
| Alka Sagar |
| Josephine L Staton |
| Consumer Credit |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1441 Notice of Removal - Fair Credit Reporting Act |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on September 1, 2023. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 16 Receipt of Letter of Transmittal - Remand to Superior Court. (jp) |
| Filing 15 TRANSMITTAL of documents to Los Angeles County Superior Court. A certified copy of the order of remand and a copy of the docket sheet from this court was sent to Los Angeles County Superior Court - Norwalk Courthouse. Case number: 23NWCV01814. (jp) |
Filing 14
MINUTES (IN CHAMBERS) ORDER Remanding Action by Judge Josephine L. Staton: Thiscase is REMANDED to Los Angeles County Superior Court, Case No. 23NVCV01814. (Made JS-6 Case Terminated.) (jp)
|
| Filing 13 RESPONSE filed by Defendant Navient Solutions LLCto Order to Show Cause, #12 (Lueck, Dennis) |
|
Filing 12
MINUTE (IN CHAMBERS) Order to Show Cause Why This Case Should Not Be Remanded to State Court by Judge Josephine L. Staton: Navient is ORDERED to show cause, in writing, no later than five days from the date of this Order, why the Court should not remand this action to state court. (jp)
|
| Filing 11 EX PARTE APPLICATION to Extend Time to File Answer to 9/15/2023 re Complaint - (Discovery) filed by Defendant Navient Solutions LLC. (Attachments: #1 Declaration of Megan G. Bruyns, #2 Proposed Order) (Bruyns, Megan) |
|
Filing 10
ORDER SETTING SCHEDULING CONFERENCE by Judge Josephine L. Staton. Scheduling Conference set for 9/29/2023 at 10:30 a.m. See order for details. (gga)
|
|
Filing 9
SELF-REPRESENTATION ORDER by Judge Josephine L. Staton. See document for further information. (jp)
|
| Filing 8 INITIAL STANDING ORDER FOR CIVIL CASES ASSIGNED TO JUDGE JOSEPHINE L. STATON. (gga) |
| Filing 7 NOTICE of Appearance filed by attorney Megan Kathleen Gabbar Bruyns on behalf of Defendant Navient Solutions LLC (Attorney Megan Kathleen Gabbar Bruyns added to party Navient Solutions LLC(pty:dft))(Bruyns, Megan) |
| Filing 6 Notice to Counsel Re Consent to Proceed Before a United States Magistrate Judge. (sh) |
| Filing 5 NOTICE TO PARTIES OF COURT-DIRECTED ADR PROGRAM filed. (sh) |
| Filing 4 NOTICE OF ASSIGNMENT to District Judge Josephine L. Staton and Magistrate Judge Alka Sagar. (sh) |
| CONFORMED EFILED COPY OF COMPLAINT against Defendants Does, Navient Solutions LLC., filed by Plaintiff Ralph Pickett Jr.[FILED IN STATE COURT 06/13/2023 SUBMITTED AS ATTACHMENT NO. 1 EXHIBIT 1 TO THE NOTICE OF REMOVAL #1 ] (sh) |
| Filing 3 CORPORATE DISCLOSURE STATEMENT and Notice of Interested Parties filed by Defendant NAVIENT SOLUTIONS, LLC identifying Navient Corporation as Corporate Parent. (Lueck, Dennis) |
| Filing 2 CIVIL COVER SHEET filed by Defendant NAVIENT SOLUTIONS, LLC. (Lueck, Dennis) |
| Filing 1 NOTICE OF REMOVAL from Los Angeles County Superior Court, case number 23NWCV01814 Receipt No: ACACDC-35825806 - Fee: $402, filed by Defendant NAVIENT SOLUTIONS, LLC. (Attachments: #1 Complaint, #2 Redacted Document Notice of Case Management Conference) (Attorney Dennis N. Lueck, Jr added to party NAVIENT SOLUTIONS, LLC(pty:dft))(Lueck, Dennis) |
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.
