LUCAS v. TELECHECK SERVICES, INC. et al
| CEDRIC L. LUCAS |
| MARK WALLIN and TELECHECK SERVICES, INC. |
| 1:2019cv02637 |
| September 3, 2019 |
| US District Court for the District of Columbia |
| Amit P Mehta |
| Consumer Credit |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1441 |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on September 9, 2019. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Set/Reset Deadlines: Plaintiff's Response due by 9/23/2019. (zjd) |
Filing 5
ORDER advising Plaintiff to respond by September 23, 2019, to Defendants' #3 Motion to Dismiss or risk dismissal of the case. See the attached Order for additional details. Signed by Judge Amit P. Mehta on 09/09/2019. (lcapm1)
|
| Filing 4 MOTION to Dismiss Under FRCP 12(b)(1) and FRCP 12(b)(6), and Proposed Order by TELECHECK SERVICES, INC., MARK WALLIN (Endersby, Austen) |
| Filing 3 NOTICE to Counsel/Party re #1 Notice of Removal, (zeg) |
| Case Assigned to Judge Amit P. Mehta. (zeg) |
| Filing 2 LCvR 26.1 CERTIFICATE OF DISCLOSURE of Corporate Affiliations and Financial Interests by TELECHECK SERVICES, INC. (Endersby, Austen) |
| Filing 1 NOTICE OF REMOVAL from D.C. Superior Court, Small Claims Division, case number 2019SC3005056 Filing fee $ 400, receipt number 0090-6354031 filed by TELECHECK SERVICES, INC., MARK WALLIN. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet, #2 Exhibit Exhibit A, #3 Exhibit Exhibit B, #4 Exhibit Exhibit C)(Endersby, Austen) |
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 District Of Columbia 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.
