Leticia Rodriguez v. Snap Finance, LLC
| Leticia Rodriguez |
| Snap Finance, LLC |
| 8:2020cv00508 |
| March 12, 2020 |
| US District Court for the Central District of California |
| Douglas F McCormick |
| James V Selna |
| Consumer Credit |
| 47 U.S.C. ยง 0227 |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on April 16, 2020. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 11
ORDER GRANTING STIPULATION TO STAY ACTION AND ARBITRATE ALL CLAIMS by Judge James V. Selna. Having reviewed the parties' Stipulation to Arbitrate and Stay Action, and finding good cause, the Stipulation is GRANTED. #10 (MD JS-6. Case Terminated) (es)
|
| Filing 10 STIPULATION to Stay Case pending Arbitration filed by Defendant Snap Finance, LLC. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit 1, #2 Proposed Order)(Taylor, Tanya) |
| Filing 9 Notice of Appearance or Withdrawal of Counsel: for attorney Tanya M Taylor counsel for Defendant Snap Finance, LLC. Adding Tanya M. Taylor as counsel of record for Snap Finance, LLC for the reason indicated in the G-123 Notice. Filed by Defendant Snap Finance, LLC. (Attorney Tanya M Taylor added to party Snap Finance, LLC(pty:dft))(Taylor, Tanya) |
| Filing 8 [SERVICE OF SUMMONS AND COMPLAINT RETURNED EXECUTED] SERVICE UNDER FRCP 5(b)(2)(D) Executed by Plaintiff Leticia Rodriguez, upon Defendant Snap Finance, LLC served on 3/25/2020, answer due 4/15/2020. Service of the Summons and Complaint were executed upon the Clerks Office in compliance with Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. (Hammoud, Youssef) Modified on 4/2/2020 (es). |
| Filing 7 21 DAY Summons Issued re Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening) #1 as to Defendant Snap Finance, LLC. (car) |
| Filing 6 NOTICE TO PARTIES OF COURT-DIRECTED ADR PROGRAM filed. (car) |
| Filing 5 NOTICE OF ASSIGNMENT to District Judge James V. Selna and Magistrate Judge Douglas F. McCormick. (car) |
| Filing 4 Request for Clerk to Issue Summons on Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening) #1 filed by plaintiff Leticia Rodriguez. (Hammoud, Youssef) |
| Filing 3 NOTICE of Interested Parties filed by Plaintiff Leticia Rodriguez, (Hammoud, Youssef) |
| Filing 2 CIVIL COVER SHEET filed by Plaintiff Leticia Rodriguez. (Hammoud, Youssef) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT Receipt No: ACACDC-25713025 - Fee: $400, filed by plaintiff Leticia Rodriguez. (Attorney Youssef Hussein Hammoud added to party Leticia Rodriguez(pty:pla))(Hammoud, Youssef) |
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
| Search for this case: Leticia Rodriguez v. Snap Finance, LLC | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Defendant: Snap Finance, LLC | |
| Represented By: | Tanya M Taylor |
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Finance | [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Plaintiff: Leticia Rodriguez | |
| Represented By: | Youssef Hussein Hammoud |
| Represented By: | Lauren Tegan Rodkey |
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Finance | [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
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.
