Rodriguez v. Equifax Information Services, LLC et al
| Sergio Rodriguez |
| Equifax Information Services, LLC, Americas Servicing Company and America's Servicing Company |
| 3:2022cv00425 |
| March 31, 2022 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of California |
| Karen S Crawford |
| M James Lorenz |
| Consumer Credit |
| 15 U.S.C. ยง 1681 Fair Credit Reporting Act |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on March 16, 2023. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 8
Notice of Document Discrepancies and Order Thereon by Judge M. James Lorenz Rejecting re #7 MOTION to Substitute Attorney and Order thereon, from Plaintiff Sergio Rodriguez. Non-compliance with local rule(s), ECF 2(h): Includes a proposed order or requires judges signature, ECF 2.f.2: If the original document requires the signature of a non-registered signatory, the filing party must scan and electronically file the original document.. IT IS HEREBY ORDERED: The document is rejected. It is ordered that the Clerk STRIKE the document from the record, and serve a copy of this order on all parties (Attachments: #1 Rejected Document) (fth)
|
|
Filing 7
*DOCUMENT STRICKEN PER #8 NOTICE AND ORDER*** MOTION to Substitute Attorney and Order thereon by Sergio Rodriguez. (Allard-Reyes, David) (fth). Modified on 5/17/2022 (fth). (Main Document 7 replaced on 5/17/2022) (fth).
|
|
Filing 6
Notice of Document Discrepancies and Order Thereon by Judge M. James Lorenz Rejecting re #4 MOTION to Substitute Attorney , from Plaintiff Sergio Rodriguez. Non-compliance with local rule(s), Civil Local Rule or Electronic Case Filing Administrative Policies and Procedures Manual provision (ECF) Discrepancy ECF 2(h): "The proposed order must be in editable word processing format (i.e. Microsoft Word), and not in.pdf format.". IT IS HEREBY ORDERED: The document is rejected. It is ordered that the Clerk STRIKE the document from the record, and serve a copy of this order on all parties (Attachments: #1 Rejected Document)(fth)
|
|
Filing 5
Notice of Document Discrepancies and Order Thereon by Judge M. James Lorenz Accepting re #4 MOTION to Substitute Attorney , from Plaintiff Sergio Rodriguez. Non-compliance with local rule(s), Civil Local Rule or Electronic Case Filing Administrative Policies and Procedures Manual provision ("ECF") Discrepancy ECF 2(h): "The proposed order must be in editable word processing format (i.e. Microsoft Word), and not in.pdf format." IT IS HEREBY ORDERED: The document is accepted despite the discrepancy noted above. Any further non-compliant documents may be stricken from the record (fth)
|
|
Filing 4
MOTION to Substitute Attorney by Sergio Rodriguez. (Allard-Reyes, David)Attorney David Scott Allard-Reyes added to party Sergio Rodriguez(pty:pla) (fth). (Main Document 4 replaced on 4/27/2022) (fth).
|
|
Filing 3
Corporate Disclosure Statement by Sergio Rodriguez. No Corporate Parents/Interested Parties. (Ordonez, Sarita) (jpp).
|
|
Filing 2
Summons Issued. Counsel receiving this notice electronically should print this summons and serve it in accordance with Rule 4, Fed.R.Civ.P and LR 4.1. (cxt)(jrd)
|
|
Filing 1
COMPLAINT With Jury Demand Against Equifax Information Services, LLC, America's Servicing Company ( Filing fee $ 402 receipt number ACASDC-16698977.), filed by Sergio Rodriguez. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet)The new case number is 3:22-cv-425-L-KSC. Judge M. James Lorenz and Magistrate Judge Karen S. Crawford are assigned to the case. (Ordonez, Sarita)(cxt)(jrd)
|
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 Southern 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.
