Lockett v. Synchrony Financial et al
| Emmanuel Marquis Lockett |
| Synchrony Financial and Daniel D. Doubles |
| 3:2021cv01383 |
| October 18, 2021 |
| US District Court for the District of Connecticut |
| Vanessa L Bryant |
| Consumer Credit |
| 15 U.S.C. ยง 1681 |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on October 18, 2021. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 6 MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis by Emmanuel Marquis Lockett. (Fazekas, J.) |
Filing 5
ORDER RE: Judge's Chambers Practices. Counsel are directed to read and comply with the Chambers Practices and Standing Orders prior to filing any document. So ordered Signed by Judge Vanessa L. Bryant on 10/18/2021.(Fazekas, J.)
|
|
Filing 4
STANDING PROTECTIVE ORDER Signed by Judge Vanessa L. Bryant on 10/18/2021.(Fazekas, J.)
|
|
Filing 3
ELECTRONIC FILING ORDER FOR COUNSEL - PLEASE ENSURE COMPLIANCE WITH COURTESY COPY REQUIREMENTS IN THIS ORDER Signed by Judge Vanessa L. Bryant on 10/18/2021.(Fazekas, J.)
|
|
Filing 2
Order on Pretrial Deadlines: Amended Pleadings due by 12/17/2021. Discovery due by 4/19/2022. Dispositive Motions due by 5/24/2022. Signed by Clerk on 10/18/2021.(Fazekas, J.)
|
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT against Daniel D. Doubles, Synchrony Financial, filed by Emmanuel Marquis Lockett. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet, #2 Envelope)(Fazekas, J.) |
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 Connecticut 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.
