Michael Bales Roddy v. Miles Westbrook & Deal, LLP et al
| Michael Bales Roddy |
| Miles Westbrook & Deal, LLP, The National Collection Agency, Inc and Does 1-10, Inclusive |
| 2:2024cv00385 |
| January 16, 2024 |
| US District Court for the Central District of California |
| Dolly M Gee |
| Michael R Wilner |
| Consumer Credit |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1441 Notice of Removal - Fair Credit Reporting Act |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on February 20, 2024. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 11
ORDER TO EXTEND TIME TO RESPOND TO INITIAL COMPLAINT BY AN ADDITIONAL 30 DAYS by Judge Dolly M. Gee: The Court has reviewed the parties' Stipulation #10 . IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendants shall have until 3/25/2024 to file a responsive pleading to the initial complaint. (gk)
|
| Filing 10 Second STIPULATION Extending Time to Answer the complaint as to Miles Westbrook & Deal, LLP answer now due 3/25/2024, re Complaint - (Discovery), filed by Defendant Miles Westbrook & Deal, LLP. (Attachments: #1 Proposed Order, #2 Certificate of Service)(Chambers, Amy) |
| Filing 9 NOTICE TO FILER OF DEFICIENCIES in Electronic Filed Document RE: Consent to Proceed (CV-11C) DECLINED before US Magistrate Judge Direct Assignment Program #8 . The following error(s) was/were found: The filing of a Declination Statement of Consent to Proceed before a Magistrate Judge only applies to cases under the "Magistrate Judge Direct Assignment Program", wherein the initial judge assignment as the presider of the case is assigned to a magistrate judge. This case is not under that program. In response to this notice, the Court may: (1) order an amended or correct document to be filed; (2) order the document stricken; or (3) take other action as the Court deems appropriate. You need not take any action in response to this notice unless and until the Court directs you to do so. (rn) |
| Filing 8 DECLINED STATEMENT OF CONSENT TO PROCEED before the assigned Magistrate Judge filed by Plaintiff Michael Bales Roddy. (Veggian, Lauren) |
|
Filing 7
INITIAL STANDING ORDER upon filing of the complaint by Judge Dolly M. Gee. (kd)
|
| Filing 6 Notice to Counsel Re Consent to Proceed Before a United States Magistrate Judge. (car) |
| Filing 5 NOTICE TO PARTIES OF COURT-DIRECTED ADR PROGRAM filed. (car) |
| Filing 4 NOTICE OF ASSIGNMENT to District Judge Dolly M. Gee and Magistrate Judge Michael R. Wilner. (car) |
| Filing 3 Joint STIPULATION Extending Time to Answer the complaint as to filed by Defendant Mile Westbrook & Deal, LLP.(Attorney Amy Patricia Chambers added to party Mile Westbrook & Deal, LLP(pty:dft))(Chambers, Amy) |
| CONFORMED COPY OF COMPLAINT against Defendants Does 1-10, Inclusive, Miles Westbrook & Deal, LLP, The National Collection Agency, Inc. Jury Demanded, filed by Plaintiff Michael Bales Roddy. Filed in State Court on 11/16/2023 Submitted with Attachment 1 Exhibit A to Notice of Removal #1 (car) |
| Filing 2 NOTICE of Interested Parties filed by Defendant The National Collection Agency, Inc, (Kaminski, David) |
| Filing 1 NOTICE OF REMOVAL from Los Angeles Superior Court, case number 23LBCV02195 Receipt No: ACACDC-36730876 - Fee: $405, filed by Defendant The National Collection Agency, Inc. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A, #2 Civil Cover Sheet) (Attorney David J. Kaminski added to party The National Collection Agency, Inc(pty:dft))(Kaminski, David) |
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.
