Schwab v. Roosen, Varchetti & Olivier, PLLC
| Ashley Schwab |
| Roosen, Varchetti & Olivier, PLLC |
| 3:2022cv01798 |
| October 6, 2022 |
| US District Court for the Northern District of Ohio |
| Jeffrey J Helmick |
| Other Statutory Actions |
| 15 U.S.C. ยง 1692 Fair Debt Collection Act |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on November 10, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 6
Order of Case Dismissal with prejudice. re #5 . Judge Jeffrey J. Helmick on 11/10/22. (M,SM)
|
| Filing 5 Notice of Dismissal Under FRCP 41(a)(1) With Prejudice filed by Ashley Schwab. (Hyslip, Jeffrey) |
|
Order [non-document]: Plaintiff has indicated this case has settled, and she intends to dismiss the case within 60 days. In light of this, Defendant's deadline to file an answer or other responsive pleading is stayed. Plaintiff shall file the notice of dismissal on or before 1/6/2023. re #4 . Judge Jeffrey J. Helmick on 10/31/22. (M,SM)
|
| Filing 4 Settlement Notice filed by Ashley Schwab. (Hyslip, Jeffrey) |
| Filing 3 Return of Service by personal service executed upon Roosen, Varchetti & Olivier, PLLC on 10/18/2022, filed on behalf of Ashley Schwab (Hyslip, Jeffrey) |
| Filing 2 Original Summons and Magistrate Consent Form issued to counsel for service upon Roosen, Varchetti & Olivier, PLLC. (Attachments: #1 Magistrate Consent Form) (R,EM) |
| Notice re Prompt Service. Counsel for Plaintiff is responsible for promptly serving the Complaint on Defendant(s) upon receiving the issued summons from the Clerk and, after service has been perfected, electronically filing a Return of Service or an executed Waiver of Service for each Defendant.Service is to be accomplished pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 4, which includes provisions for personal service and waiver of service, and Local Rule 4.2. If you wish the Clerk to serve the Complaint on Defendant(s) (a seldom used alternative because it does not save time or money), you must provide the Clerk's office with copies of the Complaint along with other necessary documents, in the manner set forth in Local Rule 4.2(a). (R,EM) |
| Judge Jeffrey J. Helmick assigned to case. (R,EM) |
| Random Assignment of Magistrate Judge pursuant to Local Rule 3.1. In the event of a referral, case will be assigned to Magistrate Judge Darrell A. Clay. (R,EM) |
| Filing 1 Complaint with jury demand against Roosen, Varchetti & Olivier, PLLC. Filing fee paid $ 402, Receipt number AOHNDC-11653298. Filed by Ashley Schwab. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet, #2 Summons) (Hyslip, Jeffrey) |
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 Ohio Northern 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
| Search for this case: Schwab v. Roosen, Varchetti & Olivier, PLLC | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Plaintiff: Ashley Schwab | |
| Represented By: | Jeffrey S. Hyslip |
| 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 ] |
| Defendant: Roosen, Varchetti & Olivier, PLLC | |
| 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.
