Hinsley v. CreditBox.com, LLC
Plaintiff: Tiffany Hinsley
Defendant: Creditbox.Com, LLC
Case Number: 2:2021cv00281
Filed: March 26, 2021
Court: US District Court for the District of New Mexico
Presiding Judge: Gregory J Fouratt
Referring Judge: William P Johnson
Nature of Suit: Contract: Other
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 1441
Jury Demanded By: None
Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on July 20, 2021. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
May 19, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 13 RESPONSE to Motion re #11 MOTION to Remand MOTION FOR REMAND filed by CreditBox.com, LLC. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A) (Muirhead, Megan)
April 30, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 12 NOTICE by CreditBox.com, LLC of Extension of Time (Wright, Jeffrey)
April 23, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 11 MOTION to Remand MOTION FOR REMAND by Tiffany Hinsley. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit 1-7) (Mattison, Nicholas)
April 16, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 10 NOTICE by Tiffany Hinsley Notice of Extension of Time (Mattison, Nicholas)
April 5, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 9 NOTICE REGARDING DOCUMENT ENTRIES: Because this case has been reassigned to a district judge, please be advised that any documents filed by the parties under Rule 73(b) have been permanently removed from the docket. Document(s) removed: Nos. 3 and 5. [THIS IS A TEXT-ONLY ENTRY. THERE ARE NO DOCUMENTS ATTACHED.] (kg)
April 5, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 8 ORDER FINDING GOOD CAUSE TO DELAY ENTERING A SCHEDULING ORDER by Magistrate Judge Gregory J. Fouratt. In light of the pending #7 Motion to Compel Arbitration, the Court hereby finds good cause under Fed. R. Civ. P. 16 to delay holding a scheduling conference and entering a scheduling order. If the presiding judge denies the motion, the Court will set the matter for scheduling. (nmh)[THIS IS A TEXT-ONLY ENTRY. THERE ARE NO DOCUMENTS ATTACHED.]
April 2, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 7 MOTION to Compel Arbitration by CreditBox.com, LLC. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A, #2 Exhibit B) (Roach Martin, Tiffany)
April 1, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 6 PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that this case has been reassigned to Chief United States District Judge William P. Johnson as the trial judge. Under D.N.M.LR-Civ. 10.1, the first page of each document must have the case file number and initials of the assigned judges.Accordingly, further documents filed in this matter must bear the case number and the judges' initials shown in the case caption and the NEF for this document. Kindly reflect this change in your filings. United States Magistrate Judge Carmen E. Garza no longer assigned to this case.[THIS IS A TEXT-ONLY ENTRY. THERE ARE NO DOCUMENTS ATTACHED.] (jg)
March 31, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 4 SUMMONS Returned Executed by Tiffany Hinsley. CreditBox.com, LLC served on 2/26/2021, answer due 3/19/2021. (Mattison, Nicholas)
March 29, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 2 PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that this case has been randomly assigned to United States Magistrate Judge Carmen E. Garza to conduct dispositive proceedings in this matter, including motions and trial. Appeal from a judgment entered by a Magistrate Judge will be to the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit. It is the responsibility of the case filer to serve a copy of this Notice upon all parties with the summons and complaint. Consent is strictly voluntary, and a party is free to withhold consent without adverse consequences. Should a party choose to consent, notice should be made no later than 21 days after entry of the Order setting the Rule 16 Initial Scheduling Conference. For e-filers, visit our Web site at www.nmd.uscourts.gov for more information and instructions.[THIS IS A TEXT-ONLY ENTRY. THERE ARE NO DOCUMENTS ATTACHED.] (arp)
March 29, 2021 Opinion or Order Office code correction. Case office code has been changed from 1 (Albuquerque) to 2 (Las Cruces). (arp)
March 29, 2021 Opinion or Order United States Magistrate Judge Carmen E. Garza and United States Magistrate Judge Gregory J. Fouratt assigned. (arp)
March 26, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 1 NOTICE OF REMOVAL by Creditbox.Com, LLC from First Judicial District Court, case number D-117-CV-2021-00030. ( Filing Fee - Online Payment), filed by Creditbox.Com, LLC. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A, #2 Exhibit B, #3 Exhibit C, #4 Exhibit D, #5 Exhibit E, #6 Exhibit F, #7 Exhibit G, #8 Exhibit H, #9 Exhibit I, #10 Exhibit J, #11 Exhibit K, #12 Exhibit L, #13 Exhibit M, #14 Exhibit N, #15 Exhibit O, #16 Exhibit P, #17 Exhibit Q, #18 Exhibit R, #19 Civil Cover Sheet)(Roach Martin, Tiffany)
March 26, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing and Administrative Fees Received: $ 402 receipt number ANMDC-7612962 re #1 Notice of Removal,, filed by Creditbox.Com, LLC (Payment made via Pay.gov)(Roach Martin, Tiffany)

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 New Mexico District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Hinsley v. CreditBox.com, LLC
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Creditbox.Com, LLC
Represented By: Tiffany L Roach Martin
Represented By: Jeffrey Adam Wright
Represented By: Megan Muirhead
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 ]
Plaintiff: Tiffany Hinsley
Represented By: Nicholas H. Mattison
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.


Why Is My Information Online?