Ditech Financial, LLC v. SFR Investment Pool 1, LLC et al
| Ditech Financial, LLC |
| Montenegro Estates, Nevada Association Services, Inc. and SFR Investments Pool 1, LLC |
| 2:2016cv01880 |
| August 9, 2016 |
| U.S. District Court for the District of Nevada |
| Las Vegas Office |
| Jennifer A. Dorsey |
| George Foley |
| Constitutional - State Statute |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 2201 Constitutionality of State Statute(s) |
| None |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
68
ORDER Granting 67 Stipulation of Dismissal. IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff's claims against Montenegro Estates are DISMISSED with prejudice, each side to bear its own fees and costs. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that all remaining parties mu st file a stipulated dismissal of all remaining claims or a joint status report explaining when such a dismissal will be filed by 8/31/2020. Signed by Judge Jennifer A. Dorsey on 8/25/2020. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - MR)
|
|
Filing
63
ORDER Granting 62 Stipulation to Stay. The parties must file a stipulated dismissal or status update by 5/6/2020. Signed by Judge Jennifer A. Dorsey on 2/7/2020. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - MR)
|
|
Filing
60
ORDER Granting 59 Stipulation to Substitute Real Party in Interest. Signed by Magistrate Judge Elayna J. Youchah on 2/3/2020. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - MR)
|
|
Filing
49
ORDER Granting 48 Stipulation for Extension of Time re 1 Complaint (Second Request). Montenegro Estates answer due 8/2/2019. Signed by Magistrate Judge George Foley, Jr on 7/22/2019. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - MR)
|
|
Filing
47
ORDER Granting 46 Stipulation fo Extension of Time re 1 Complaint (First Request). Montenegro Estates answer due 7/19/2019. Signed by Magistrate Judge George Foley, Jr on 6/24/2019. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - MR)
|
|
Filing
45
ORDER. IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that 44 the motion to lift stay is GRANTED IN PART in that THE STAY IS LIFTED but some of the other details and deadlines requested by the motion are denied or revised. See Order for deadlines. Signed by Judge Jennifer A. Dorsey on 6/11/2019. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - MR)
|
|
Filing
41
ORDER. IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that this case is STAYED. Once the United States Supreme Court proceedings in Bourne Valley and Saticoy Bay have concluded, any party may move to lift this stay. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the pending 14 and 15 motions to dismiss are Denied without prejudice to their refiling within 20 days of the order lifting the stay. Signed by Judge Jennifer A. Dorsey on 03/01/2017. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - NEV)
|
|
Filing
33
ORDER Discovery Plan/Scheduling Order due by 2/13/2017. Signed by Magistrate Judge George Foley, Jr on 2/3/2017. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - JM)
|
|
Filing
23
ORDER Granting 17 Motion for Demand for Security of Costs. IT IS ORDERED that plaintiff has until 1/22/17, to present to the Clerk of Court $500.00 in lawful money as security in compliance with NRS 18.130(1). IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the CLERK OF COURT is directed to accept the deposit of $500.00 from plaintiff under NRS 18.130 as security for costs and charges that may be awarded against this plaintiff. Signed by Judge Jennifer A. Dorsey on 1/12/17. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - cc: Finance - ADR)
|
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the U.S. Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the Nevada 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.
