Brown v. Credence Resource Management
| Rori Brown |
| Credence Resource Management |
| 8:2023cv02626 |
| September 27, 2023 |
| US District Court for the District of Maryland |
| Paula Xinis |
| Contract: Recovery/Enforcement |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1441 Removal - Fair Credit Reporting Act |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on October 19, 2023. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 11 Rule 12/56 notice mailed to Rori Brown (c/m) (hmls, Deputy Clerk) |
| Filing 10 MOTION to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim by Credence Resource Management (Attachments: #1 Memorandum in Support, #2 Text of Proposed Order)(Fisher, Thomas) |
| Filing 9 (FILED IN ERROR - COUNSEL TO REFILE) MOTION to Dismiss by Credence Resource Management (Attachments: #1 Memorandum in Support, #2 Text of Proposed Order)(Fisher, Thomas) Modified on 10/18/2023 (hmls, Deputy Clerk). |
| Filing 8 MOTION for Extension of Time to File Answer re #4 Complaint by Credence Resource Management (Attachments: #1 Text of Proposed Order)(Fisher, Thomas) |
| Filing 7 QC NOTICE re: #1 Notice of Removal, filed by Credence Resource Management. **Counsel for Defendant added Pro Se Plaintiff's email address to this case for electronic notification in error. A Pro Se Party must consent to electronic notification. The email address has been removed and a removal notification letter and optional consent forms were mailed to plaintiff. A certificate of service by mail is required of all filings in this case. Thank you. (dass, Deputy Clerk) |
| Filing 6 Correspondence to Pro Se Plaintiff re: Removal Notification Letter. (Attachments: #1 NEF consent form, #2 EDSS flyer)(dass, Deputy Clerk) (c/m 9/28/23) |
| Filing 5 Clerk's Notice of Standing Order concerning removal actions filed in this Court, which can be downloaded #here. (dass, Deputy Clerk) (c/m 9/28/23) |
| Filing 4 COMPLAINT against Credence Resource Management, filed by Rori Brown.(dass, Deputy Clerk) |
| THE ABOVE DOCUMENT (4) IS A COPY OF ORIGINAL PAPER FILED IN THE DISTRICT COURT FOR PRINCE GEORGE'S COUNTY. (dass, Deputy Clerk) |
| Filing 3 Local Rule 103.3 Disclosure Statement by Credence RM (Fisher, Thomas) |
| Filing 2 NOTICE by Credence RM re #1 Notice of Removal, - Civil Cover Sheet (Fisher, Thomas) |
| Filing 1 NOTICE OF REMOVAL from District Court for Prince George's County, case number D-05-CV-23-028337. ( Filing fee $ 402 receipt number AMDDC-10840693), filed by Credence RM. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit Complaint, #2 Exhibit Writ of Summons)(Fisher, Thomas) |
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 Maryland 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: Brown v. Credence Resource Management | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Plaintiff: Rori Brown | |
| 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: Credence Resource Management | |
| Represented By: | Thomas Hunter Fisher |
| 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.
