Gilmour II v. Transunion, LLC et al
| Robert W. Gilmour, II |
| M&T Bank Mortgage, Transunion, LLC and Experian Information Services, Inc. |
| 2:2018cv01211 |
| July 3, 2018 |
| US District Court for the District of Nevada |
| Las Vegas Office |
| Peggy A Leen |
| Gloria M Navarro |
| Consumer Credit |
| 15 U.S.C. ยง 1681 |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on March 19, 2019. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 3 Summons Issued as to Experian Information Services, Inc., M&T Bank Mortgage, Transunion, LLC re #1 Complaint. (MMM) |
| Filing 2 CERTIFICATE of Interested Parties by Robert W. Gilmour II. There are no known interested parties other than those participating in the case (Fox, Erik-Anthony) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT against All Defendants (Filing fee $400 receipt number 0978-5144477) by Robert W. Gilmour II. Proof of service due by 10/1/2018. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet Civil Cover Sheet, #2 Summons for Transunion LLC, #3 Summons for Experian, #4 Summons for M&T Bank)(Fox, Erik-Anthony) NOTICE of Certificate of Interested Parties requirement: Under Local Rule 7.1-1, a party must immediately file its disclosure statement with its first appearance, pleading, petition, motion, response, or other request addressed to the court. |
| Case assigned to Chief Judge Gloria M. Navarro and Magistrate Judge Peggy A. Leen. (MMM) |
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 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.
