Castro v. NewRez LLC et al
| Mario E. Castro |
| NewRez LLC doing business as Shellpoint Mortage Servicing, Experian Information Solutions, Inc., Trans Union, LLC and Equifax, Information Services, LLC |
| 2:2022cv06340 |
| October 13, 2022 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of New York |
| Central Islip Office |
| Joanna Seybert |
| James M Wicks |
| Other Statutory Actions |
| 15 U.S.C. ยง 1681 Fair Credit Reporting Act |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on April 18, 2023. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 10
RESPONSE TO ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE filed by Mario E. Castro. (CV)
|
|
ORDER. In light of the Plaintiff's payment of the required fee, the Court hereby renews its October 26th Order to Show Cause. Plaintiff is directed to respond via letter to the questions set out in the October 26th Order to Show Cause on or before November 30, 2022. It is respectfully requested that the Clerk of Court mail a copy of this Order and the October 26th Order to Show Cause to the pro se Plaintiff at his address of record. So Ordered by Magistrate Judge James M. Wicks on 11/21/2022. (JR)
|
|
Filing 9
FILING FEE: $ 402.00, Receipt Number: 200000635. (CV)
|
|
Filing 8
ORDER denying #7 Motion for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis; ORDERED that Plaintiff's Renewed IFP Application (ECF No. 7) is DENIED; IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that if Plaintiff wishes to proceed with this action, he is to remit the $402.00 filing fee within fourteen (14) days from the date of this Order. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1915(a)(3), the Court certifies that any appeal from this Order would not be in good faith and therefore IFP status is DENIED for the purpose of any appeal. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of Court is directed to mail a copy of this Order to the pro se Plaintiff at his address of record. So Ordered by Judge Joanna Seybert on 11/3/2022. C/M (CV)
|
|
Filing 7
MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis Long Form by Mario E. Castro. (CV)
|
|
ORDER. In light of the Court's denial of Plaintiff's motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis, the Order to Show Cause on the issue of standing is hereby WITHDRAWN. It is respectfully requested that the Clerk of Court mail a copy of this Order to the pro se Plaintiff at his address of record. So Ordered by Magistrate Judge James M. Wicks on 10/26/2022. (JR)
|
|
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE: To assist the Court in its review of standing in this action, Plaintiff is directed to respond via letter on or before November 2, 2022, as follows: 1. Does Plaintiff claim any concrete, particularized injury in fact from the statutory violations alleged herein? If so, please set forth such injury/injuries with particularity. See TransUnion LLC, 141 S. Ct. at 2203); Maddox v. Bank of New York Mellon Tr. Co., N.A., 19 F.4th 58, 60 (2d Cir. 2021). 2. If Plaintiff is not claiming any such concrete injury, in light of the Supreme Court's decision in Transunion, Plaintiff shall provide any authority or basis for Plaintiff to assert standing in this action, or indicate whether the action should be dismissed. Defendants, if having appeared by that time, shall file any response thereto within 5 days of the filing by Plaintiff. It is respectfully requested that the Clerk of Court mail a copy of this Order to the pro se Plaintiff at his address of record. So Ordered by Magistrate Judge James M. Wicks on 10/26/2022. (JR)
|
|
Filing 6
Letter from Pro Se Office to Pro Se Litigant dated 10/25/2022 Re: RECEIPT OF CIVIL ACTION(S). (CV)
|
|
Filing 5
ORDER denying #2 Motion for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis; ORDERED: (A) Plaintiff's IFP Motion is DENIED without prejudice to renew in accordance with the instructions herein; (B) If Plaintiff intends to proceed with this action, by no later than 14 days from the date of this Order, Plaintiff is to either: (1) Pay the full filing fee of $402.00; or (2) Submit the IFP Long Form for the Court's consideration. ORDERED that the Clerk of Court is directed to mail a copy of this Order to the pro se Plaintiff at his address of record, together with the IFP Long Form; and ORDERED that pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1915(a)(3), the Court certifies that any appeal from this Order would not be in good faith and therefore IFP status is DENIED for the purpose of any appeal. So Ordered by Judge Joanna Seybert on 10/21/2022. C/M (CV)
|
|
Filing 4
Notice of Related Case: The Case was directly assigned as a related Pro Se/Habeas Case. (CL)
|
|
Filing 3
In accordance with Rule 73 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and Local Rule 73.1, the parties are notified that if all parties consent a United States magistrate judge of this court is available to conduct all proceedings in this civil action including a (jury or nonjury) trial and to order the entry of a final judgment. Attached to the Notice is a blank copy of the consent form that should be filled out, signed and filed electronically only if all parties wish to consent. The form may also be accessed at the following link: #http://www.uscourts.gov/uscourts/FormsAndFees/Forms/AO085.pdf. You may withhold your consent without adverse substantive consequences. Do NOT return or file the consent unless all parties have signed the consent. (CL)
|
|
Filing 2
MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis by Mario E. Castro. (CL)
|
|
Filing 1
COMPLAINT against All Defendants Was the Disclosure Statement on Civil Cover Sheet completed -no,, filed by Mario E. Castro. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet) (CL)
|
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 York 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.
