Schwartzenberger v. Augusta Precious Metals
Plaintiff: Bobbie Schwartzenberger
Defendant: Augusta Precious Metals
Case Number: 2:2026cv00486
Filed: November 4, 2026
Court: U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Washington
Nature of Suit: Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA)
Cause of Action: 47 U.S.C. ยง 227 FCC-Unsolicited Telephone Sales
Jury Demanded By: Plaintiff
Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on November 4, 2026. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
November 4, 2026 Filing 1 COMPLAINT against Augusta Precious Metals ( Filing fee $ 405; Receipt # AWAEDC-5086203) Jury Demand. Filed by Bobbie Schwartzenberger. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet, #2 Summons)(Shamis, Andrew)

Access additional case information on PACER

Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the U.S. Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.

Access this case on the Washington Eastern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Schwartzenberger v. Augusta Precious Metals
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Augusta Precious Metals
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 [ Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Bobbie Schwartzenberger
Represented By: Andrew John Shamis
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 [ 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?