Cush-EL v. Synchrony Bank
U'Eea Cush-EL |
Synchrony Bank and Synchrony Bank Headquaters |
4:2019cv02771 |
October 14, 2019 |
US District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri |
John M Bodenhausen |
Contract: Other |
28 U.S.C. ยง 1331 |
None |
Docket Report
This docket was last retrieved on January 10, 2020. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
Document Text |
---|
Filing 12 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER: IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff is to Show Cause, in writing and no later than December 20, 2019, why Defendant's Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 7) should not be granted. Failure to respond might result in dismissal of this case without prejudice. Signed by Magistrate Judge John M. Bodenhausen on 11/21/19. (ARL) |
ORDER RECEIPT: (see receipt) Docket No: 12. Thu Nov 21 13:57:57 CST 2019 (Luisetti, Andrea) |
Notice from Clerk instructing Plaintiff U'Eea Cush-EL to submit Notice regarding Magistrate Judge Jurisdiction. Click #here for the instructions. (NEP) |
Filing 11 ORDER: This case is before the undersigned pursuant to Local Rule 2.08(A) of the Local Rules of the Eastern District of Missouri. Pending is a motion to dismiss, which the Court cannot rule on without the full, written consent of the parties. Consequently, no later than November 8, 2019, any party that has not consented must submit to the Clerk's Office a completed consent/option form either consenting to the jurisdiction of the undersigned Magistrate Judge or opting to have the case randomly assigned to a United States District Judge. Signed by Magistrate Judge John M. Bodenhausen on 10/30/19. (KEK) |
ORDER RECEIPT: (see receipt) Docket No: 11. Wed Oct 30 11:11:08 CDT 2019 (Kratzer, Katie) |
Filing 10 Pursuant to Local Rule 2.08, the assigned/referred magistrate judge is designated and authorized by the court to exercise full authority in this assigned/referred action or matter under 28 U.S.C. Sec. 636 and 18 U.S.C Sec. 3401, including any case budgeting matters. (CSAW) |
Filing 8 MEMORANDUM in Support of Motion re #7 MOTION to Dismiss Case filed by Defendant Synchrony Bank. (Smeltzer, Katrina) |
Filing 7 MOTION to Dismiss Case by Defendant Synchrony Bank. (Smeltzer, Katrina) |
Filing 6 NOTICE OF FILING NOTICE OF REMOVAL filed by Defendant Synchrony Bank Sent to Plaintiff, Sent To: State Court - Executed (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A)(Smeltzer, Katrina) |
Case Opening Notification: All parties must file the Notice Regarding Magistrate Judge Jurisdiction Form consenting to or opting out of the Magistrate Judge jurisdiction. Click #here for the instructions. Judge Assigned: Honorable John M. Bodenhausen. (MFG) |
Filing 9 Petition (Removal/Transfer) Received From: Circuit Court of St. Louis County, filed by U'Eea Cush-EL.(MFG) |
Filing 5 DISCLOSURE OF ORGANIZATIONAL INTERESTS CERTIFICATE by Defendant Synchrony Bank. Parent companies: Synchrony Financial,. (Smeltzer, Katrina) |
Filing 4 ENTRY of Appearance by Timothy Charles Sansone for Defendant Synchrony Bank. (Sansone, Timothy) |
Filing 3 ENTRY of Appearance by Katrina Smeltzer for Defendant Synchrony Bank. (Smeltzer, Katrina) |
Filing 2 NOTICE Notice to Plaintiff of Removal: by Defendant Synchrony Bank re #1 Notice of Removal Petition, (Smeltzer, Katrina) |
Filing 1 NOTICE OF REMOVAL from 21st Judicial Circuit Court, St. Louis County, Missouri, case number 19SL-SC00891, with receipt number AMOEDC-7517672, in the amount of $400 Non-Jury Demand,, filed by Synchrony Bank. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit 1, #2 Exhibit 2, #3 Exhibit 3, #4 Civil Cover Sheet Civil Cover Sheet)(Smeltzer, Katrina) |
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 Missouri 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
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.