Ranagan Kelley v. JPMORGAN CHASE BANK, N.A.
| Robin Ranagan Kelley |
| JP Morgan Chase Bank, N.A. |
| 1:2018cv23967 |
| September 26, 2018 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of Florida |
| Jose E Martinez |
| Alicia M Otazo-Reyes |
| Negotiable Instrument |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1332 |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on November 5, 2018. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 13
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE. ( Show Cause Response due by 11/19/2018). In the alternative, response to #7 Motion to Dismiss due by 11/19/2018. Signed by Judge Jose E. Martinez on 11/5/2018. See attached document for full details. (ar2)
|
| Filing 12 MOTION for Status Conference re #10 MOTION for Extension of Time to Conduct Scheduling Conference re #4 Order Requiring Joint Scheduling ReportUnopposed MOTION to Conduct Scheduling Conference by Telephone re #4 Order Requiring Joint Scheduling Report , #7 MOTION TO DISMISS #1 Notice of Removal (State Court Complaint), FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM With Prejudice, 11 Order on Motion for Extension of Time,, Order on Motion for Miscellaneous Relief, by JP Morgan Chase Bank, N.A.. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit 1 - Oct. 22, 2018 Letter, #2 Exhibit 2 - Draft Joint Scheduling Report and Proposed Scheduling Order, #3 Exhibit 3 - Proposed Order)(Lechich, Brian) |
|
Filing 11
PAPERLESS ORDER granting #10 Defendant's Motion to Conduct Scheduling Conference by Telephone and for Extension of Time to Conduct Scheduling Conference. The parties may conduct their scheduling conference telephonically. The parties shall comply with the Court's Order requiring a joint scheduling report and proposed order #4 on or before November 5, 2018. Signed by Judge Jose E. Martinez on 10/18/2018. (ean)
|
| Filing 10 MOTION for Extension of Time to Conduct Scheduling Conference re #4 Order Requiring Joint Scheduling Report ( Responses due by 11/1/2018), Unopposed MOTION to Conduct Scheduling Conference by Telephone re #4 Order Requiring Joint Scheduling Report by JP Morgan Chase Bank, N.A.. (Attachments: #1 Text of Proposed Order)(Lechich, Brian) |
| Filing 9 STATUS REPORT Regarding Removal by JP Morgan Chase Bank, N.A. (Lechich, Brian) |
| Filing 8 FIRST Clerk's Notice of Undeliverable Mail re #3 Order Referring Case to Magistrate Judge, #4 Order Requiring Joint Scheduling Report, 2 Clerk's Notice of Judge Assignment,,. US Mail returned for: Robin Ranagan Kelly. The Court has not located an updated address for this party. After two undeliverable notices from the Court, notices will no longer be sent to this party in this case until a correct address is provided. (pgz) |
| Filing 7 MOTION TO DISMISS #1 Notice of Removal (State Court Complaint), FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM With Prejudice by JP Morgan Chase Bank, N.A.. Responses due by 10/17/2018 (Lechich, Brian) |
| Filing 6 Certificate of Interested Parties/Corporate Disclosure Statement by JP Morgan Chase Bank, N.A. identifying Corporate Parent JPMorgan Chase & Co. for JP Morgan Chase Bank, N.A. (Lechich, Brian) |
| Filing 5 Notice of Court Practice in Removal Cases. Signed by Judge Jose E. Martinez on 10/1/2018. See attached document for full details. (dq) |
|
Filing 4
Order Requiring Joint Scheduling Report. Signed by Judge Jose E. Martinez on 10/1/2018. See attached document for full details. (dq)
|
|
Filing 3
ORDER REFERRING CASE to Magistrate Judge Alicia M. Otazo-Reyes for all Pretrial Proceedings and for a Report and Recommendation. Signed by Judge Jose E. Martinez on 10/1/2018. See attached document for full details. (mc)
|
| Filing 2 Clerks Notice of Judge Assignment to Judge Jose E. Martinez. Pursuant to 28 USC 636(c), the parties are hereby notified that the U.S. Magistrate Judge Alicia M. Otazo-Reyes is available to handle any or all proceedings in this case. If agreed, parties should complete and file the Consent form found on our website. It is not necessary to file a document indicating lack of consent. Pro se (NON-PRISONER) litigants may receive Notices of Electronic Filings (NEFS) via email after filing a Consent by Pro Se Litigant (NON-PRISONER) to Receive Notices of Electronic Filing. The consent form is available under the forms section of our website. (cbr) |
| Filing 1 NOTICE OF REMOVAL (STATE COURT COMPLAINT - Complaint for Damages) Filing fee $ 400.00 receipt number 113C-11025814, filed by JPMORGAN CHASE BANK, N.A. d/b/a CHASE. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit 1 - Complaint, #2 Exhibit 2 - All filings and Docket from State Court, #3 Civil Cover Sheet)(Lechich, Brian) |
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 Florida 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
| Search for this case: Ranagan Kelley v. JPMORGAN CHASE BANK, N.A. | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Defendant: JP Morgan Chase Bank, N.A. | |
| Represented By: | Jose Antonio Ortiz |
| Represented By: | Brian John Lechich |
| 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 ] |
| Plaintiff: Robin Ranagan Kelley | |
| 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.
