Jones v. First Advantage Background Services Corp.
| David Jones |
| First Advantage Background Services Corp. |
| 2:2023cv00120 |
| September 8, 2023 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of Kentucky |
| David L Bunning |
| Candace J Smith |
| 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 September 28, 2023. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 7
ORDER: Plaintiff's Motion for Refund of Fees #6 is DENIED. Signed by Magistrate Judge Candace J. Smith on 9/28/2023. (TJZ)cc: COR
|
| ***MOTION SUBMITTED TO CHAMBERS of David L. Bunning for review: re #5 MOTION to Dismiss by David Jones (SLG) |
| Clerk's Note: Modified to reflect motion per the Clerk re #6 MOTION for Refund of Fees Paid Electronically. (SLG) |
| Filing 6 MOTION FOR REFUND OF FEES PAID ELECTRNICALLY by David Jones re #1 Complaint . (Craig, James) Modified text on 9/11/2023 (SLG). |
| Filing 5 Stipulation of Dismissal by David Jones (Attachments: #1 Proposed Order)(Craig, James) Modified text on 9/29/2023 (TJZ). |
|
Filing 4
STANDING REFERRAL ORDER: 1) Case referred to assigned U.S. Magistrate Judge to supervise discovery and pretrial proceedings; 2) Magistrate Judge is authorized to conduct all pretrial and status conferences, to hold such hearings as may be required, and to rule on nondispositive motions, except motions in limine. Dispositive motions and motions in limine will be referred by the Clerk of this court to the undersigned. The final pretrial conference and trial will also be before the undersigned, unless parties agree to a trial by a Magistrate Judge; 3) Discovery disputes shall be resolved in the following manner: (1) Parties to meet/confer in an attempt to resolve disputes; (2) If parties unable to resolve such disputes formally, they shall attempt to resolve their disagreements by telephone conference with the Magistrate Judge; (3) If parties unable to resolve their disputes after conference with the Magistrate Judge, they may file appropriate written motions with the Court, which shall include the certification required. Signed by Judge David L. Bunning on 1/13/2011. (TJZ)cc: COR
|
| Filing 3 Summons Issued as to First Advantage Background Services Corp. and returned to counsel electronically for service. (TJZ) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT AND DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL ( Filing fee $402; receipt number AKYEDC-5645755), filed by David Jones. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet, #2 Summons)(TJZ) |
| Conflict Check run. (TJZ) |
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 Kentucky Eastern 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: Jones v. First Advantage Background Services Corp. | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Plaintiff: David Jones | |
| Represented By: | James Robert Craig |
| 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: First Advantage Background Services Corp. | |
| 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.
