Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Bereket v. Portfolio Recovery Associates, LLC

United States District Court, W.D. Washington, Seattle

February 28, 2018

ABBY BEREKET, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff,
v.
PORTFOLIO RECOVERY ASSOCIATES, LLC, et al., Defendants.

          ORDER OF CLARIFICATION

          RICARDO S. MARTINEZ, CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

         Order THIS MATTER comes before the Court on Plaintiff's request for clarification. Dkt. #49. Plaintiff seeks clarification of recent Minute Orders issued by the Court after several duplicative filings were made by Plaintiff. Id. Having reviewed the record before it, the Court now CLARIFIES its prior Orders.

         As an initial matter, the Court notes that Plaintiff's counsel has consistently failed to properly file documents through the Court's CM/ECF filing system. Indeed, the Court previously advised Plaintiff's counsel to familiarize themselves with the Court's Local Rules and warned Plaintiff's counsel that the failure to adhere to the Court's Local Rules with future filings may result in those filings being stricken from the record. Dkt. #23 at 1, fn.2. Despite this warning, Plaintiff's counsel has continued to file documents under the incorrect CM/ECF events, and has admittedly filed duplicative documents due to filing errors on their end. See Dkt. #49. As a result, the docket is clogged with multiple documents, making it very difficult for anyone, including the Court, to follow the current procedural posture of the pending motions.

         As best the Court can discern, the following documents have been filed:

1. Plaintiff's Motion to Certify Class (Dkt. #33, Noted for Consideration on 2/16/18);
a. Defendant's Response and Supporting Declaration (Dkts. #36 and #37);
b. Plaintiff's Reply and Supporting Declaration (Dkts. #38 and #39).

         Briefing is complete on this motion and the Court will consider it in due course. No further briefing shall be filed pertaining to this motion.

         2. Defendant's Motion to Compel and Declaration in support thereof (Dkts. #34 and #35; Noted for Consideration on 2/23/18);

a. Plaintiff's Response and Supporting Declarations (Dkt. #40;filed on 2/20/18 and which were incorrectly filed as a “Reply to Response to Motion and Supplements”);
b. Plaintiff's Response to Motion to Compel (Dkt. #42; filed on 2/21/18; duplicative and without supplements);
c. Declaration of Counsel in Opposition to Motion to Compel (Dkt. #43; filed on 2/21/18; duplicative, with exhibits);
d. Opposition to Motion to Compel filed by Non-Parties (Dkt. #44-2; filed on 2/21/18 with exhibits; filed as an attachment to a duplicative motion to quash);
e. Third Party Declaration in Opposition to Motion to Compel (Dkt. #44-3; filed on 2/21/18 as supplement to ...

Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.