Complaint Not Yet Publicly Available
The complaint in this case has not yet been made publicly available through the federal court system. I only quote directly from publicly released court documents — I do not paraphrase or summarize complaint language.
You can monitor this case and access filings as they are released at the CourtListener docket page. I will update this post when the complaint becomes available.
Quick Answer: A federal lawsuit was filed by Solangon against Midland Credit Management on July 6, 2026 in the U.S. District Court (DISTRICT COURT, D. NEVADA). Case No. 2:26-cv-02029. The full complaint has not yet been made available through public court records. This page will be updated with the complete allegations when the complaint is published. This is a legal filing, not a verdict.
Case Update — August 28, 2026
2026-07-06: Assign Judges in Civil Case — Link
2026-07-07: Assign Judges in Civil Case — Link
2026-07-07: Doc 2 — Advisory Letter Pro Se non-habeas — Link
2026-07-13: Doc 3 — Consent for Electronic Service of Documents — Link
2026-08-10: Doc 7 — ORDER Granting 1 Motion/Application for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis. The Clerk’s Office is INSTRUCTED to file Plaintiff’s complaint (Docket No. 1 -1) on the docket.The Clerk’s Office is INSTRUCTED to file Plaintiff 9;s complaint (Docket No. 1 -1) on the docket. Plaintiff shall have twenty days in which to furnish the U.S. Marshal with the required Form USM-285.2 Within twenty days after receiving from the U.S. Marshal a copy of the Form USM-285, showing wh ether service has been accomplished, Plaintiff must file a notice with the court identifying whether defendant was served. If Plaintiff wishes to have service again attempted on an unserved defendant, a motion must be filed with the Court identifyin g the unserved defendant and specifying a more detailed name and/or address for said defendant, or whether some other manner of service should be attempted. Pursuant to Rule 4(m) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, service must be accomplis hed within 90 days from the date this order is entered. From this point forward, Plaintiff shall serve upon Defendant, or, if appearance has been entered by counsel, upon the attorney(s), a copy of every pleading, motion, or other document submi tted for consideration by the court. Plaintiff shall include with the original papers submitted for filing a certificate stating the date that a true and correct copy of the document was mailed to Defendants or counsel for Defendants. The Court may disregard any paper received by a District Judge or Magistrate Judge that has not been filed with the Clerk, and any paper received by a District Judge, Magistrate Judge, or the Clerk that fails to include a certificate of service. Signed by Magistrate Judge Nancy J. Koppe on 8/10/2026.(Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF – JG) — Link
📄 Download document from CourtListener →
2026-08-10: Doc 6 — ORDER [Docket Nos. 4 , 5 ] – Accordingly, the motions are DENIED without prejudice. Signed by Magistrate Judge Nancy J. Koppe on 8/10/2026. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF – DLS) — Link
📄 Download document from CourtListener →
2026-08-10: Doc 4 — Motion Pro Se Litigant to File Electronically — Link
2026-08-10: Doc 5 — Ex Parte Motion — Link
2026-08-11: Doc 9 — Summons Issued — Link
2026-08-19: Doc 13 — Order on Motion to Expedite — Link
2026-08-19: Doc 12 — Order on Motion for Pro Se Litigant to File Electronically — Link
2026-08-19: Doc 10 — Motion Expedite — Link
2026-08-19: Doc 11 — Motion Pro Se Litigant to File Electronically — Link
2026-08-21: Doc 14 — Certificate Interested Parties — Link
2026-08-24: Doc 15 — Motion Miscellaneous Relief — Link
2026-08-24: Doc 16 — Motion Miscellaneous Relief — Link
2026-08-26: Doc 17 — Order AND Order on Motion for Miscellaneous Relief AND Order on Motion for Miscellaneous Relief — Link
2026-08-27: Doc 18 — Complaint Amended — Link
Case Status: The complaint in this case has not yet been uploaded to the RECAP archive. When it becomes available, the full text of the allegations will be reproduced on this page.
To access the complaint directly, you can search for Case No. 2:26-cv-02029 on PACER (the federal court electronic records system). PACER charges $0.10/page, but the first $30/quarter is free for most users.
About This Coverage
I monitor federal court cases involving debt relief companies as an educational resource for consumers, other companies in the industry, and regulators. This project began on February 27, 2026, and covers cases filed on or after February 20, 2026. Cases filed before that date are not included. I am currently monitoring 334 companies in the debt relief space.
I report on all cases I am able to monitor — no company is singled out or targeted. The goal is comprehensive, fair coverage that helps consumers understand the legal landscape.
Important: The information on this page comes directly from court documents. I present the allegations exactly as stated in those filings — I do not interpret, summarize, or paraphrase complaint language, as doing so could introduce unintended bias. These are allegations, not findings of fact. Every defendant is presumed innocent and has the right to contest the claims in court. A lawsuit is not a finding of wrongdoing.
You can view the full docket at CourtListener.
Are you a party to this case? I welcome statements, corrections, and updates from any party — plaintiff, defendant, or their counsel. If you'd like to add context or a statement for readers, please contact me directly. I will publish it here.
Frequently Asked Questions
Why doesn’t this page have the full complaint yet?
Federal court complaints are filed through the PACER system. They become available for free public access when they are uploaded to the RECAP archive (a free, open repository of federal court documents). Not all filings are uploaded immediately. When this complaint becomes available, the full text will be added to this page.
Has Midland Credit Management been found liable?
No. A complaint is a legal filing that contains allegations. Midland Credit Management has not been found liable for any wrongdoing. Courts require proof before entering judgment.
The Daily Money Brief — Free, at 10 AM
Money you may be owed, scams to dodge, and the fine print decoded — the consumer money news that affects your wallet, every weekday.
Source: CourtListener — Solangon v. Midland Credit Management, Inc., Docket 73577804. This case is being tracked for updates.
Dealing With Debt? Understanding your options is the first step. See how all your debt relief options compare — including ones most sites won’t tell you about. The Find Your Path quiz gives a recommendation based on your actual numbers, and the Scam-O-Meter checks any company’s complaint history before you sign. Federal Reserve research shows bankruptcy filers recover faster than those who don’t file.
Part of the Federal Lawsuits Database
This case is one of 353 federal court cases involving debt relief companies tracked at Federal Lawsuits Against Debt Relief Companies. Browse by company type, legal claim, or alleged conduct to identify industry-wide patterns.
Are you dealing with a debt relief company? If you're considering working with a debt relief company or have already signed a contract, use my free Find Your Path tool to get personalized guidance on your situation.
