Roger Shekar v. PHH Mortgage Corporation, et al
| ROGER SHEKAR |
| PHH MORTGAGE CORPORATION, ONITY GROUP INC., GLEN MESSINA, SELENE HOLDINGS, LLC, PRETIUM PARTNERS, LLC, ALTISOURCE LLC, OCWEN FINANCIAL CORPORATION, OCWEN LOAN SERVICING, LLC, KATIE BREWER and IMELDA AVALOS |
| 25-13218 |
| September 17, 2025 |
| U.S. Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit |
| Other Contract Actions |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on October 10, 2025. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 11 Notice that no action will be taken on Motion to vacate court's order [ # 9 ] filed by Appellant Roger Shekar. Reason(s) no action being taken on filing(s): The deficiencies that caused this case to be dismissed have not been remedied.. [Entered: 10/10/2025 03:52 PM] |
| Filing 10 Certificate of Interested Persons and Corporate Disclosure Statement filed by Party Roger Shekar. On the same day the CIP is served, any filer represented by counsel must also complete the court's web-based stock ticker symbol certificate at the link here http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/web-based-cip or on the court's website. See 11th Cir. R. 26.1-1(b). [25-13218] (ECF: Roger Shekar) [Entered: 10/10/2025 02:06 PM] |
| Filing 9 TIME SENSITIVE MOTION to vacate court's order filed by Roger Shekar. Motion is Unopposed. [9] [25-13218] (ECF: Roger Shekar) [Entered: 10/10/2025 02:04 PM] |
| Filing 8 Notice that no action will be taken on petition for rehearing en banc (with panel rehearing), Sanctions filed by Appellant Roger Shekar. Reason(s) no action being taken on filing(s): The deficiencies that caused this case to be dismissed have not been remedied. This case is closed. [ # 7 ] [Entered: 10/10/2025 12:59 PM] |
| Filing 7 Petition for rehearing en banc (with panel rehearing) Motion for sanctions on Clerk filed by Appellant Roger Shekar. [25-13218]--[Edited 10/10/2025 by RAV] (ECF: Roger Shekar) [Entered: 10/07/2025 05:51 PM] |
| Filing 6 Notice that no action will be taken on Motion to proceed in forma pauperis [ # 5 ], Motion to vacate clerk's order [ # 4 ] filed by Appellant Roger Shekar. Reason(s) no action being taken on filing(s): The deficiencies that caused this case to be dismissed have not been remedied.. [Entered: 10/07/2025 03:35 PM] |
| Filing 5 MOTION to proceed IFP filed by Appellant Roger Shekar. Motion is Unopposed [5] [25-13218] (ECF: Roger Shekar) [Entered: 10/07/2025 12:07 PM] |
| Filing 4 TIME SENSITIVE MOTION to vacate clerk's order filed by Roger Shekar. Motion is Unopposed. [4] [25-13218] (ECF: Roger Shekar) [Entered: 10/07/2025 12:03 PM] |
Filing 3
ORDER: Pursuant to the 11th Cir. R. 42-1(b), this appeal is DISMISSED for want of prosecution because the appellant Roger Shekar failed to pay the filing and docketing fees to the district court, or alternatively, file a motion to proceed in forma pauperis in district court within the time fixed by the rules [Entered: 10/07/2025 08:56 AM]
|
| Filing 2 NOTICE TO PARTIES: Due to the large number of parties associated with this appeal, not all parties from the district court docket have been entered on this Court's docket at this time. The parties may consult the relevant notice(s) of appeal, other case documents, and the district court docket to identify all parties. If any party objects to not having all parties listed on the docket, the party may file an objection stating its reasoning within 14 days after the date of this notice. [Entered: 09/18/2025 10:47 AM] |
| Filing 1 CIVIL APPEAL DOCKETED. Notice of appeal filed by Appellant Roger Shekar on 09/17/2025. Fee Status: Fee Not Paid. Awaiting Appellant's Certificate of Interested Persons due on or before 10/06/2025 as to Appellant Roger Shekar. [Entered: 09/18/2025 10:43 AM] |
Access additional case information on PACER
Access the Case Summary and Docket Report to access additional information about this case on the U.S. Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
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.
