New filings swept, and every case page now accounts for its claims summary (September 6, 2026)
A search for newly filed cases found one, and it is the tracker's first from the Eastern District of New York. Tufano v. All-Ways Forwarding, 1:26-cv-05474, was filed there on September 1, 2026 and is now recorded as C105. It names the same defendant as two records already on file: a Lackawanna County action and its removal to the Middle District of Pennsylvania, which the federal court dismissed on July 13, 2026, with the claims against U.S. Customs and Border Protection dismissed with prejudice. An appeal from that dismissal was docketed at the Third Circuit ten days later and is still pending. The new action was filed 50 days after the dismissal, in a third forum and a different circuit. No document on the new docket can be read without a PACER purchase, so what it pleads is unknown; for that reason it is coded Unclear under the published repeat-filing protocol rather than as a repeat filing, and its filing-restriction indicator is graded Moderate, not Strong. Four other sweeps returned nothing new. A nationwide federal party search confirmed that all eight Third Circuit appeals on record are already tracked. New York state court was swept statewide by party name and by the two company names, and by a business-name search for Tufano: every result was either already tracked or established to be a different person. The Lackawanna County general and judgment indexes were swept for the personal name and for both company names: the Tufano Frank bucket holds 39 cases, the same count as the August sweep, and every company docket returned was already on file. One further docket filed under the same name in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania was checked and excluded: its complaint identifies a different Frank Tufano, an Illinois resident represented by counsel in a pharmaceutical products-liability MDL. All four exclusions are written down so the same dockets are not re-investigated.
Every case page now accounts for its own “About this case” section. C092, the one remaining case with no claims summary, has one: its complaint was read in full and describes a failed purchase of a property in Jefferson County, a $5,000 deposit, and a contract contingent on a USDA loan that was denied. The new E.D.N.Y. case cannot have one, because no document on its docket is obtainable, so its page now says that in place of the section rather than omitting it silently.
Related cases
Note
The tracker now holds 105 docket records. The new case is recorded with no claims summary and no repeat-filing code, because its complaint is not available from any free source; both will be added if that changes.
A case whose complaint cannot be obtained from a free public source now says so on its page, under the same heading other cases use for their summary of the allegations. Previously the section was simply absent, which read the same as a case nobody had researched yet.