Susan Shaw v. Synchrony Bank et al
| Susan Shaw |
| Equifax Information Services, LLC and Synchrony Bank |
| 5:2020cv01963 |
| September 21, 2020 |
| US District Court for the Central District of California |
| R Gary Klausner |
| Sheri Pym |
| Consumer Credit |
| 15 U.S.C. ยง 1681 |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on January 19, 2021. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 14 PROOF OF SERVICE Executed by Plaintiff Susan Shaw, upon Defendant Synchrony Bank served on 10/13/2020, answer due 12/1/2020. Service of the Summons and Complaint were executed upon Owen Watkins, Head Security Officer, authorized to receive service of process for Synchrony Bank in compliance with Federal Rules of Civil Procedure by service on a domestic corporation, unincorporated association, or public entity.Original Summons NOT returned. (Apps, Stanley) |
| Filing 13 STIPULATION Extending Time to Answer the complaint as to Synchrony Bank answer now due 12/1/2020, re Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening), #1 filed by Defendant Synchrony Bank.(Attorney Steven P Warner added to party Synchrony Bank(pty:dft))(Warner, Steven) |
| Filing 12 STIPULATION Extending Time to Answer the complaint as to Equifax Information Services, LLC answer now due 11/23/2020, re Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening), #1 filed by defendant Equifax Information Services, LLC.(Quinn, Thomas) |
| Filing 11 NOTICE of Appearance filed by attorney Thomas P Quinn, Jr on behalf of Defendant Equifax Information Services, LLC (Attorney Thomas P Quinn, Jr added to party Equifax Information Services, LLC(pty:dft))(Quinn, Thomas) |
| Filing 10 PROOF OF SERVICE Executed by Plaintiff Susan Shaw, upon Defendant Equifax Information Services, LLC served on 10/5/2020, answer due 10/26/2020. Service of the Summons and Complaint were executed upon Registered Agent in compliance with Federal Rules of Civil Procedure by service on a domestic corporation, unincorporated association, or public entity.Original Summons returned. (Apps, Stanley) |
| Filing 9 21 DAY Summons Issued re Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening) #1 as to Defendants Equifax Information Services, LLC, Synchrony Bank. (Attachments: #1 Summ issued as to Equifax information Services LLC) (jp) |
Filing 8
STANDING ORDER REGARDING NEWLY ASSIGNED CASES by Judge R. Gary Klausner. (jre)
|
| Filing 7 Request for Clerk to Issue Summons on Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening), #1 filed by Plaintiff Susan Shaw. (Attachments: #1 Proposed Summons to Equifax Information Services, LLC)(Apps, Stanley) |
| Filing 6 Notice to counsel re consent to proceed before a United States Magistrate Judge Eastern Division Blackout Case. (ghap) |
| Filing 5 NOTICE TO PARTIES OF COURT-DIRECTED ADR PROGRAM filed. (ghap) |
| Filing 4 NOTICE OF ASSIGNMENT to District Judge R. Gary Klausner and Magistrate Judge Sheri Pym. (ghap) |
| Filing 3 NOTICE of Interested Parties filed by Plaintiff Susan Shaw, identifying Law Offices of Robert S. Gitmeid, P.C.; Law Offices of Robert S. Gitmeid & Associates, PLLC. (Apps, Stanley) |
| Filing 2 CIVIL COVER SHEET filed by Plaintiff Susan Shaw. (Apps, Stanley) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT Receipt No: ACACDC-28174448 - Fee: $400, filed by Plaintiff Susan Shaw. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A, #2 Exhibit B, #3 Exhibit C, #4 Exhibit D, #5 Exhibit E) (Attorney Stanley Robert Apps added to party Susan Shaw(pty:pla))(Apps, Stanley) |
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.
