Spain v. Synchrony Bank et al
| Samira Spain |
| Synchrony Bank and Experian Information Solutions, Inc. |
| 1:2022cv00693 |
| February 8, 2022 |
| US District Court for the Northern District of Illinois |
| Franklin U Valderrama |
| Consumer Credit |
| 15 U.S.C. ยง 1681 Fair Credit Reporting Act |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on March 21, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 7 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Franklin U. Valderrama: Before the Court is the notice of settlement between Plaintiff and Defendant Experian Information Services, Inc. (Experian) #6 . By 5/27/2022, Plaintiff and Experian shall file either (1) the appropriate settlement documents, or (2) a short status report explaining the reason for the delay in completing the settlement. Mailed notice (axc). |
| Filing 6 Notice of Settlement by Samira Spain (Mikulaschek, Alexander) |
| Filing 5 Defenses and ANSWER to Complaint by Synchrony Bank(Carwinski, Timothy) |
| SUMMONS Issued as to Defendants Experian Information Solutions, Inc., Synchrony Bank (sxh, ) |
| Filing 4 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Franklin U. Valderrama: On or before 04/25/2022 the parties shall file a joint initial status report. A template for the Joint Initial Status Report, setting forth the information required, may be found at http://www.ilnd.uscourts.gov/Judges.aspx by clicking on Judge Valderrama's name and then again on the link entitled 'Joint Initial Status Report. Plaintiff must serve this Minute Entry on all other parties. If the defendant(s) has not been served with process by that date, plaintiff's counsel is instructed to file an individual status report indicating the status of service of process by the same deadline. The parties are further ordered to review all of Judge Valderrama's standing orders and the information available on his webpage. Any nongovernmental corporate party that qualifies under the Rules is reminded of the requirement to file a disclosure statement under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 7.1/N.D. Ill. Local Rule 3.2. Mailed notice (axc). |
| Filing 3 CIVIL Cover Sheet (Mikulaschek, Alexander) |
| Filing 2 ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff Samira Spain by Alexander John Mikulaschek (Mikulaschek, Alexander) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT filed by Samira Spain; Jury Demand. Filing fee $ 402, receipt number 0752-19135673. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit Settlement Agreement, #2 Exhibit Proof of Payment, #3 Exhibit Credit Report, #4 Exhibit Dispute Letter, #5 Exhibit Credit Report)(Mikulaschek, Alexander) |
| CLERK'S NOTICE: Pursuant to Local Rule 73.1(b), a United States Magistrate Judge of this court is available to conduct all proceedings in this civil action. If all parties consent to have the currently assigned United States Magistrate Judge conduct all proceedings in this case, including trial, the entry of final judgment, and all post-trial proceedings, all parties must sign their names on the attached #Consent To# form. This consent form is eligible for filing only if executed by all parties. The parties can also express their consent to jurisdiction by a magistrate judge in any joint filing, including the Joint Initial Status Report or proposed Case Management Order. (jmk, ) |
| CASE ASSIGNED to the Honorable Franklin U. Valderrama. Designated as Magistrate Judge the Honorable Jeffrey Cummings. Case assignment: Random assignment. (jmk, ) |
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.
