Shah v. Citibank, N.A.
| Vivek Shah |
| Citibank, N.A. |
| 1:2022cv02437 |
| May 8, 2022 |
| US District Court for the Northern District of Illinois |
| John Robert Blakey |
| 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 June 23, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 17 MINUTE entry before the Honorable John Robert Blakey: The Court grants Defendant's unopposed motion to extend time #15 and orders Defendant to respond to Plaintiff's complaint by 7/19/22. The parties shall file a joint status report by 7/25/22. Mailed notice (gel, ) |
| Filing 16 STATUS Report Joint Initial Status Report by Citibank, N.A. (Peel, Emily) |
| Filing 15 MOTION by Defendant Citibank, N.A. for extension of time Unopposed Motion for an Extension of Time to File a Responsive Pleading (Peel, Emily) |
| Filing 14 NOTICE of Correction regarding #12 (exr, ) |
| Filing 13 ATTORNEY Appearance for Defendant Citibank, N.A. by Emily Louise Peel (Peel, Emily) |
| Filing 12 ENTERED IN ERROR |
| Filing 11 SUMMONS Returned Executed by Vivek Shah as to Citibank, N.A. on 6/1/2022, answer due 6/22/2022. (Shah, Vivek) |
| Filing 10 MINUTE entry before the Honorable John Robert Blakey: Consistent with the Court's prior order #4 , the parties shall file a joint status report by 6/23/22. If Defendant is not yet at issue, Plaintiff shall file an individual status report concerning his efforts to serve Defendant. Mailed notice (gel, ) |
| Filing 9 MOTION by Plaintiff Vivek ShahRefund of Overpayment of Filing Fees (Attachments: #1 Exhibit)(Shah, Vivek) |
| SUMMONS Issued as to Defendant Citibank, N.A. (ak, ) |
| Filing 7 COMPLAINT filed by Vivek Shah. (lxk, ) |
| Filing 5 MINUTE entry before the Honorable John Robert Blakey: Plaintiff submitted a pro se complaint #1 , but failed to pay the $402 filing fee or file an application for leave to proceed in forma pauperis. Plaintiff must do one or the other by 5/24/22 or the Court will dismiss this case. Mailed notice (gel, ) |
| Filing 4 MINUTE entry before the Honorable John Robert Blakey: This case has been assigned to the calendar of the Honorable John Robert Blakey. The litigants are ordered to review and fully comply with all of this Court's standing orders, which are available on Judge Blakey's information page on the Court's official website: http://www.ilnd.uscourts.gov/. In addition, the parties must file a status report no later than 6/23/2022, using the model template set forth in this Court's standing order regarding Initial (or Reassignment) Status Conferences. Failure by any party to file the status report by the requisite deadline (either jointly or, if necessary, individually with an explanation as to why a joint report could not be filed) may result in a summary dismissal of the case for failure to prosecute, or an entry of default against any served defendant(s) failing to comply with this order. During the litigation, the attorneys must also appear at all hearing dates set by the Court or noticed by the parties. If an attorney has a conflict with a set court date, the attorney must notify Judge Blakey's Courtroom Deputy, Gloria Lewis, at (312) 818-6699. If appropriate, the Court will then reset the matter. Advising opposing counsel of a scheduling conflict is not a substitute for communicating directly with the Court. Mailed notice (gel, ) |
| CASE ASSIGNED to the Honorable John Robert Blakey. Designated as Magistrate Judge the Honorable Sunil R. Harjani. FEE DUE, NO INFORMA PAUPERIS APPLICATION SUBMITTED. Case assignment: Random assignment. (daj, ) |
| 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. (daj, ) |
| MAILED Clerk's Notice pursuant to Local Rule 73.1(b), Consent Form to Vivek Shah (daj, ) |
| Filing 3 PRO SE Appearance by Plaintiff Vivek Shah (daj, ) |
| Filing 2 CIVIL Cover Sheet (daj, ) |
| Filing 1 RECEIVED Complaint by Vivek Shah. (Exhibits) (daj, ) |
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
| Search for this case: Shah v. Citibank, N.A. | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Plaintiff: Vivek Shah | |
| 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 ] |
| Defendant: Citibank, N.A. | |
| Represented By: | Emily Louise Peel |
| 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.
