Coleman v. Professional Bureau of Collections of Maryland, Inc. et al
| Danielle Coleman |
| Trans Union, LLC and Professional Bureau of Collections of Maryland, Inc. |
| 1:2019cv01003 |
| February 14, 2019 |
| US District Court for the Northern District of Illinois |
| Robert M Dow |
| Consumer Credit |
| 15 U.S.C. ยง 1692 |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on March 28, 2019. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 12 Joint Certification to Defer Initial Discovery Deadline (Settlement) (MIDP), filed by Defendant Trans Union, LLC. (Brady, Scott) |
| Filing 11 ANSWER to Complaint And Affirmative Defenses by Trans Union, LLC(Brady, Scott) |
| Filing 10 NOTIFICATION of Affiliates pursuant to Local Rule 3.2 by Trans Union, LLC (Brady, Scott) |
| Filing 9 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Robert M. Dow, Jr: In light of the date of service of summons on Defendants, the initial status hearing set for 3/26/2019 is stricken and reset to 4/25/2019 at 9:30 a.m. Deadline to file joint status report is now 4/23/2019. Mailed notice (cdh, ) |
| Filing 8 ATTORNEY Appearance for Defendant Trans Union, LLC by Michael Joseph Sreenan (Sreenan, Michael) |
| Filing 7 ATTORNEY Appearance for Defendant Trans Union, LLC by Scott Edwin Brady (Brady, Scott) |
| Filing 6 NOTICE TO THE PARTIES - The Court is participating in the Mandatory Initial Discovery Pilot (MIDP). The key features and deadlines are set forth in this Notice which includes a link to the (MIDP) Standing Order and a Checklist for use by the parties. In cases subject to the pilot, all parties must respond to the mandatory initial discovery requests set forth in the Standing Order before initiating any further discovery in this case. Please note: The discovery obligations in the Standing Order supersede the disclosures required by Rule 26(a)(1). Any party seeking affirmative relief must serve a copy of the following documents (Notice of Mandatory Initial Discovery and the Standing Order) on each new party when the Complaint, Counterclaim, Crossclaim, or Third-Party Complaint is served. (jh, ) |
| SUMMONS Issued as to Defendants Professional Bureau of Collections of Maryland, Inc., Trans Union, LLC (jjr, ) |
| Filing 5 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Robert M. Dow, Jr: Initial status hearing is set for 3/26/2019 at 9:00 a.m. and parties are to report the following: (1) Possibility of settlement in the case; (2) If no possibility of settlement exists, the nature and length of discovery necessary to get the case ready for trial. Plaintiff is to advise all other parties of the courts action herein. Lead counsel is directed to appear at this status hearing. The parties are requested to file a joint status report at least two days prior to the initial status. For further details see the Court's website available at www.ilnd.uscourts.gov. Mailed notice (cdh, ) |
| Filing 4 ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff Danielle Coleman by Larry Paul Smith (Smith, Larry) |
| Filing 3 ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff Danielle Coleman by David M. Marco (Marco, David) |
| Filing 2 CIVIL Cover Sheet (Marco, David) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT filed by Danielle Coleman; Jury Demand. Filing fee $ 400, receipt number 0752-15488844.(Marco, David) |
| CASE ASSIGNED to the Honorable Robert M. Dow, Jr. Designated as Magistrate Judge the Honorable Sunil R. Harjani. Case assignment: Random assignment. (ec, ) |
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 Illinois Northern 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.
