Jaffer v. Amico et al
| Shawn Jaffer |
| Sarah Riggs Amico and Stacey Abrams |
| 4:2018cv00528 |
| July 26, 2018 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of Texas |
| Sherman Office |
| Collin |
| Kimberly C Priest Johnson |
| Amos L Mazzant |
| Other Statutory Actions |
| Federal Telephone Consumer Protection Act |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on July 26, 2018. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 3 SUMMONS Issued as to Sarah Riggs Amico. (rpc, ) |
| Filing 2 SUMMONS Issued as to Stacey Abrams. (rpc, ) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT for Violation of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act against All Defendants ( Filing fee $ 400 receipt number 0540-6870640.), filed by Shawn Jaffer. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet, #2 Exhibit Exhibit A, #3 Exhibit Exhibit B)(Jaffer, Shawn) |
| In accordance with the provisions of 28 USC Section 636(c), you are hereby notified that a U.S. Magistrate Judge of this district court is available to conduct any or all proceedings in this case including a jury or non-jury trial and to order the entry of a final judgment. The form #Consent to Proceed Before Magistrate Judge is available on our website. All signed consent forms, excluding pro se parties, should be filed electronically using the event Notice Regarding Consent to Proceed Before Magistrate Judge. (rpc, ) |
| Case Assigned to District Judge Amos L. Mazzant, III and Magistrate Judge Kimberly C Priest Johnson. (rpc, ) |
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 Texas 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.
