Joseph Guy Vachon v. Reverse Mortgage Solutions Inc et al
| Joseph Guy Vachon |
| All Unnamed Unknown Parties Does, Does, Finance of America Reverse LLC, Attorney Leslie M. Klott, Rehick, Reverse Mortgage Solutions Inc, Superior Court of the State of California, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development HUD and Zieve, Brodnax and Steele LLP |
| 5:2016cv02419 |
| November 22, 2016 |
| US District Court for the Central District of California |
| Karen E. Scott |
| Dolly M. Gee |
| Civil Rights: Other |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
94
JUDGMENT by Judge Dolly M. Gee. Pursuant to the Court's Order Accepting Findings and Recommendations of United States Magistrate Judge 93 , IT IS ADJUDGED that the above-captioned action is dismissed with prejudice in its entirety. (MD JS-6, Case Terminated). (dro)
|
|
Filing
14
MINUTE (IN CHAMBERS) ORDER to show cause why action against original Defendants should not be dismissed for lack of prosecution; Plaintiff's First Amended Complaint 12 by Magistrate Judge Karen E. Scott. Accordingly, the Court hereby orders Plaintiff to show cause on or before March 20, 2017 why the original Defendants should not be dismissed for failure to effect timely service. Plaintiff may discharge this OSC by filing valid, legible proof of service declarations with the Court for each of the above- listed Defendants (excepting HUD) on or before March 20, 2017. (See document for details). (dv)
|
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.
