Kingman Holdings, LLC v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.
| Kingman Holdings, LLC and Kingman Holdings LLC |
| Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. and Wells Fargo Bank NA |
| 4:2022cv00138 |
| February 23, 2022 |
| US District Court for the Northern District of Texas |
| Mark Pittman |
| Real Property: Foreclosure |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1332 Diversity-Notice of Removal |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on April 20, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 12
ORDER: Lead counsel for each party and any unrepresented party shall confer in a face-to-face conference as soon as practicable. The Joint Report shall be filed on or before May 6, 2022. (Ordered by Judge Mark Pittman on 4/20/2022) (bdb)
|
|
Filing 11
AMENDED ORDER #6 ... The above-captioned action is before the Court by notice of removal filed by Defendant Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. ECF No. #1 . On February 24, 2022, the Court issued an Order requiring Plaintiff Kingman Holdings, LLC to file an amended complaint on or before March 7, 2022. ECF No. #4 . That Order stated that failure of any party to comply with this order may result in the imposition of sanctions, up to and including dismissal of Plaintiffs claims. Id. A review of the record reveals that Plaintiff failed to comply with the Courts Order despite the Courts warning that this could result in dismissal of this case without prejudice. See id. (Ordered by Judge Mark Pittman on 4/7/2022) (wxc)
|
|
Filing 10
ORDER...Before the Court is Defendants Motion to Reopen Case (Motion). ECF No. #8 . Having considered the Motion, Brief in Support (ECF No. #9 ), and the docket entries, the Court concludes that the Motion should be, and is hereby, GRANTED. (Ordered by Judge Mark Pittman on 4/7/2022) (wxc)
|
| Filing 9 Brief/Memorandum in Support filed by Wells Fargo Bank NA re #8 MOTION to Reopen Case [for Clarification, or in the alterative for Leave to Reopen Case] (Hess, Vincent) |
| Filing 8 MOTION to Reopen Case [for Clarification, or in the alterative for Leave to Reopen Case] filed by Wells Fargo Bank NA (Attachments: #1 Proposed Order) (Hess, Vincent) |
|
Filing 7
***VACATED PER ORDER #10 *** FINAL JUDGMENT: It is ORDERED that this civil action is DISMISSED without prejudice. (Ordered by Judge Mark Pittman on 3/9/2022) (twd) Modified on 4/7/2022 (wxc).
|
|
Filing 6
ORDER: A review of the record reveals that Plaintiff failed to comply with the Court's #4 Order despite the Courts warning that this could result in dismissal of this case without prejudice. The Court thus ORDERS that this case is DISMISSED without prejudice per Rule 41(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. (Ordered by Judge Mark Pittman on 3/9/2022) (twd)
|
|
Filing 5
Order for Scheduling Order Proposal: Joint Report Regarding Contents of Scheduling Order shall be filed on or before 3/14/2022. (Ordered by Judge Mark Pittman on 2/24/2022) (twd)
|
|
Filing 4
ORDER: The Court ORDERS that: (1) on or before 3/7/2022, Plaintiff file an amended complaint that complies with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the Local Civil Rules of the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas, and the undersigned's judge-specific requirements; and (2) on or before 3/21/2022, Defendant file an answer or other response to the amended complaint. The Court further ORDERS that failure of any party to comply with this order may result in the imposition of sanctions, up to and including dismissal of Plaintiffs claims or granting of a default judgment, as appropriate. (Ordered by Judge Mark Pittman on 2/24/2022) (twd)
|
| Filing 3 New Case Notes: A filing fee has been paid. File to: Judge Pittman. Pursuant to Misc. Order 6, Plaintiff is provided the Notice of Right to Consent to Proceed Before A U.S. Magistrate Judge. Clerk to provide copy to plaintiff if not received electronically. Attorneys are further reminded that, if necessary, they must comply with Local Rule 83.10(a) within 14 days or risk the possible dismissal of this case without prejudice or without further notice. (wxc) |
| Filing 2 CERTIFICATE OF INTERESTED PERSONS/DISCLOSURE STATEMENT by Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. identifying Corporate Parent/Other Affiliate Wells Fargo & Company for Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.. (Hess, Vincent) |
| Filing 1 NOTICE OF REMOVAL filed by Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.. (Filing fee $402; receipt number 0539-12620058) In each Notice of Electronic Filing, the judge assignment is indicated, and a link to the # Judges Copy Requirements and # Judge Specific Requirements is provided. The court reminds the filer that any required copy of this and future documents must be delivered to the judge, in the manner prescribed, within three business days of filing. Unless exempted, attorneys who are not admitted to practice in the Northern District of Texas must seek admission promptly. Forms and Instructions found at www.txnd.uscourts.gov, or by clicking here: # Attorney Information - Bar Membership. If admission requirements are not satisfied within 21 days, the clerk will notify the presiding judge. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit(s) index of matters being filed, #2 Exhibit(s) civil cover sheet, #3 Exhibit(s) supplemental civil cover sheet, #4 Exhibit(s) plaintiff's verified original petition & application for TRO, #5 Exhibit(s) defendant's original answer & counterclaim, #6 Exhibit(s) TRO and order setting hearing for TI, #7 Exhibit(s) cash bond, #8 Exhibit(s) state court docket, #9 Exhibit(s) certificate of compliance, #10 Exhibit(s) vacation letter, #11 Exhibit(s) tarrant appraisal district valuation for property) (Hess, Vincent) |
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 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
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.
