Bowhall v. Office of James M. Deimen et al
| William E. Bowhall |
| Office of James M. Deimen and US Patent Office |
| 2:2010cv00604 |
| July 14, 2010 |
| US District Court for the Middle District of Alabama |
| Montgomery Office |
| Lee |
| Myron H. Thompson |
| Wallace Capel |
| Other Fraud |
| 31 U.S.C. ยง 3731 |
| None |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
12
ORDERED as follows: 1) Mr. Bowhall's objections (Docs. # 9 - 10 ) are OVERRULED; 2) The 8 Magistrate Judge's Recommendation is ADOPTED; 3) Mr. Bowhall's claims against Dfts are DISMISSED without prejudice prior to service of process pursuant to 28 USC § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i)-(iii) and for failure to obey court orders; 4) Mr. Bowhall's filing titled "Continuation Motion with Supplemental," to the extent it contains further objections to the Recommendation, is DENIED as untimely and on the merits; 5) Any outstanding motions are DENIED as moot. Signed by Honorable William Keith Watkins on 11/15/2010. (wcl, )
|
|
Filing
8
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE; it is the RECOMMENDATION of the Magistrate Judge that: (1) Plf's claims be dismissed prior to service of process pursuant to 28 USC § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i) - (iii) and for failure to obey Court orders; (2) Any outstanding motions be DENIED as moot; Objections to R&R due by 11/1/2010. Signed by Honorable Terry F. Moorer on 10/18/2010. (wcl, )
|
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the Alabama Middle District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
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.
