Skip to content.
About GPO   |   Newsroom/Media   |   Congressional Relations   |   Inspector General   |   Careers   |   Contact   |   askGPO   |   Help  
 

  FDsys > More Information
(Search string is required)
 

16-1794 - (PS) Walker v. Specialized Loan Servicing, LLC


Download Files

Metadata

Document in Context
16-1794 - (PS) Walker v. Specialized Loan Servicing, LLC
October 6, 2016
PDF | More
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Gregory G. Hollows on 10/5/2016 GRANTING Plaintiff's 2 Motion to Proceed IFP. (Jackson, T)
January 23, 2017
PDF | More
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Gregory G. Hollows on 1/23/2017 GRANTING Plaintiff's 2 Motion to Proceed in forma pauperis; Service is now appropriate; the Clerk of the Court shall send plaintiff 1 USM-285 form for each defendant, 1 summons, a copy of the complaint, an appropriate form for consent to trial by a magistrate judge, and this court's status order; and Plaintiff is DIRECTED to supply the U.S. Marshal, within 14 days from the date this order is filed, all information needed by the Marshal to effect service of process, and shall file a statement with the court that said documents have been submitted to the United States Marshal.. (Jackson, T)
July 18, 2017
PDF | More
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Gregory G. Hollows on 7/17/2017. The 14 MOTION to DISMISS hearing date of 7/20/2017 is VACATED, and will be reset, if at all, after plaintiff complies with paragraph 2. Plaintiff shall inform the court in writing, served on defendant, about the reasons he failed to file an opposition no later than 7/31/2017. Plaintiff shall also file an opposition or a Statement of Non-Opposition to the motion, served on defendant, no later than 7/31/2017. Failure to file the statement of reasons or an opposition will be deemed as a statement of non-opposition and shall result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed. (Washington, S)
December 28, 2017
PDF | More
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Gregory G. Hollows on 12/28/2017 ORDERING the parties to file contemporaneous pleadings, no later then 1/11/2018, discussing the following: Whether the bankruptcy action is final, and if so, when did it become so; If the bankruptcy action is final, and the allegation herein is that defendant's POC filed in that bankruptcy action was deceitful, untimely, or otherwise in error, why was that issue not adjudicated in the bankruptcy action; if the asserted FDCPA violation was not adjudicated in the bankruptcy action, why the final adjudication of the bankruptcy action is not res judicata of the issue sought to be litigated here. Whether the assumed final sale of the property at issue has been made by a successor-to-defendant loan servicing company in accordance with a bankruptcy adjudication which moots the alleged errors set forth in paragraph 2. (Zignago, K.)
February 8, 2018
PDF | More
FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Gregory G. Hollows on 02/07/18 RECOMMENDING that the 14 Motion to Dismiss should be granted on the basis that a FDCPA claim cannot be asserted on the basis that a debt listed by a creditor in a bankruptcy proceeding is invalid; and the Complaint should be dismissed on the alternative grounds of res judicata. Referred to Judge Troy L. Nunley; Objections to these F&Rs due within 30 days. (Benson, A.)