(PS) Callum v. Austin Capital Bank
| Garland Callum |
| Austin Capital Bank |
| 2:2021cv01484 |
| August 18, 2021 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of California |
| Carolyn K Delaney |
| John A Mendez |
| Truth in Lending |
| 15 U.S.C. ยง 1601 Truth in Lending |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on December 21, 2021. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 12
JUDGMENT dated *12/20/21* pursuant to order signed by District Judge John A. Mendez on 12/20/21. (Benson, A.)
|
|
Filing 11
ORDER signed by District Judge John A. Mendez on 12/20/21 ADOPTING #10 Findings and Recommendations in full DISMISSING Plaintiff's claims with prejudice. CASE CLOSED (Benson, A.)
|
|
SERVICE BY MAIL: #11 Order Adopting Findings and Recommendations and #12 Judgment served on Garland Callum. (Benson, A.)
|
|
Filing 10
FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Carolyn K. Delaney on 11/12/2021 RECOMMENDING that Plaintiff's claims be dismissed with prejudice and that the Clerk of Court be directed to close this case. Referred to District Judge John A. Mendez. Objections due within 14 days after being served with these findings and recommendations. (Huang, H)
|
|
SERVICE BY MAIL: #10 Findings and Recommendations served on Garland Callum. (Huang, H)
|
|
Filing 9
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Carolyn K. Delaney on 10/6/2021 GRANTING #6 Motion for more definite statement, inaccurately filed as a Motion to Dismiss for lack of jurisdiction. The Clerk of Court is instructed to send Plaintiff, in addition to a copy of this order, the court's form Complaint for a Civil Case. Within 30 days of the date of this order, Plaintiff shall file either: An amended complaint; or A notice of voluntary dismissal of the action; and Failure to comply with this order will result in a recommendation that this case be dismissed with prejudice for failure to follow court orders. (Mena-Sanchez, L)
|
|
SERVICE BY MAIL: #9 Order, served on Garland Callum, together with a Pro Se Packet form. (Mena-Sanchez, L)
|
|
Filing 8
MINUTE ORDER issued by Courtroom Deputy J. Streeter for Magistrate Judge Carolyn K. Delaney on 09/20/2021: The deadline for receipt of plaintiff's amended complaint, or opposition to defendant's motion to dismiss/motion for more definite statement scheduled for hearing on 9/29/2021, has passed without the filing of any documents or request for an extension of time. (See ECF Nos. #6 & 7 .) Accordingly, the 9/29/2021 hearing on defendant's motion is VACATED, and the matter is taken under submission without argument pursuant to Local Rule 230(c). (Text Only Entry)(Streeter, J)
|
|
SERVICE BY MAIL: 8 Minute Order served on Garland Callum. (Streeter, J)
|
|
Filing 7
MINUTE ORDER issued by Courtroom Deputy J. Streeter for Magistrate Judge Carolyn K. Delaney on 08/26/2021: On August 25, 2021, defendant filed a motion under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) or in the alternative Rule 12(e) in which it argues that plaintiff's complaint fails to plead sufficient factual detail as required by the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 8. (ECF No. #6 .) Defendant asserts the complaint contains almost no explanation of what actions or conduct plaintiff is challenging, leaving it unsure as to how to respond to the complaint. (Id.) Without expressing any views as to the merits of defendant's motion, the court affords plaintiff an opportunity to cure the purported defects outlined in the motion: plaintiff is granted leave to file an amended complaint in accordance with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(a)(1)(B) (providing for amendment as a matter of course within 21 days of service of a motion under Rule 12). Any amended complaint must plead specific factual allegations that, if true, would "plausibly give rise to an entitlement to relief." Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662 (2009). Further, any amended complaint should clearly set forth what relief is being sought, on what theory, and with enough detail to guide discovery. McHenry v. Renne, 84 F.3d 1172, 1178 (9th Cir. 1996). Any amended complaint would be due by September 15, 2021. If plaintiff timely files an amended complaint, the court will deny without prejudice defendants motion as moot.If plaintiff chooses not to file an amended complaint, he must file a response to the motion as per Local Rule 230(c) (requiring opposition to any motion be in writing and be filed and served not less than 14 days preceding the hearing date). Thus, any opposition (instead of an amended complaint) would also be due by September 15, 2021, in advance of the September 29, 2021 hearing. (Text Only Entry)(Streeter, J)
|
|
SERVICE BY MAIL: 7 Minute Order served on Garland Callum. (Streeter, J)
|
|
Filing 6
MOTION to DISMISS for LACK of JURISDICTION by Austin Capital Bank. Motion Hearing set for 9/29/2021 at 10:00 AM in Courtroom 24 (CKD) before Magistrate Judge Carolyn K. Delaney. (Attachments: #1 Proposed Order, #2 Proof of Service)(Kronenberger, Karl) Modified on 8/26/2021 (Zignago, K.).
|
|
Filing 5
CERTIFICATE of SERVICE by Austin Capital Bank re #4 Civil New Case Documents for JAM. (Kronenberger, Karl)
|
|
Filing 4
CIVIL NEW CASE DOCUMENTS ISSUED Initial Scheduling Conference set for 1/26/2022 at 10:00 AM in Courtroom 24 (CKD) before Magistrate Judge Carolyn K. Delaney. (Attachments: #1 Consent Form) (Becknal, R)
|
|
Filing 3
CERTIFICATE of SERVICE by Austin Capital Bank re #2 Corporate Disclosure Statement, #1 Notice of Removal. (Kronenberger, Karl)
|
|
Filing 2
CORPORATE DISCLOSURE STATEMENT by Defendant Austin Capital Bank. (Kronenberger, Karl)
|
|
Filing 1
NOTICE of REMOVAL from Solano County Superior Court, case number VSC084793 by Garland Callum. (Filing fee $ 402, receipt number ACAEDC-9771848) (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet, #2 Exhibit A)(Kronenberger, Karl)
|
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 Eastern 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: (PS) Callum v. Austin Capital Bank | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Plaintiff: Garland Callum | |
| 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 ] |
| Defendant: Austin Capital Bank | |
| Represented By: | Karl S. Kronenberger |
| 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.
