Muhammad v. Sisto et al
| Shaka Senegal Muhammad |
| D.K. Sisto, W. Rodriguez, M.B. Miles, Abdul R. Nasir, P Vaughn, R. Hayward, M. Smith and J. Ridge |
| 2:2010cv00143 |
| January 19, 2010 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of California |
| Sacramento Office |
| Solano |
| Dale A. Drozd |
| Prisoner: Civil Rights |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights |
| 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
68
ORDER and FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Dale A. Drozd on 6/21/11 ORDERING that plaintiffs 26 motion for summary judgment is DENIED without prejudice to refiling within 90 days after the district judge rules on the pending motion to dismiss; Plaintiffs 44 motion for class certification is DENIED; and the Clerk of the Court is directed to randomly assign a United States District Judge to this action. It is RECOMMENDED that 42 MOTION to DISMISS be granted; Plaintiff& #039;s IFP status be revoked; and this action be dismissed without prejudice, unless plaintiff pays the full statutory filing fee by the deadline for the filing of objections to these findings and recommendations. Referred to Judge Morrison C. England, Jr.; Objections to F&R due within 21 days.(Dillon, M)
|
|
Filing
39
ORDER denying 37 Motion to Appoint Counsel signed by Magistrate Judge Dale A. Drozd on 10/19/10. (Plummer, M)
|
|
Filing
34
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Dale A. Drozd on 9/24/10 ORDERING that Defendants 32 request to modify the scheduling order in thiscase is granted, in part; parties may conduct discovery until 1/21/11; All pretrial motions, except motions to compe l discovery, shall be filedand served on or before 4/23/11. Defendants 33 request for an extension of time to respond to plaintiffs motion for summary judgment is granted. Defendants shall file and serve a response to plaintiffs motion for summary judgment on or before 12/24/10. (Dillon, M)
|
|
Filing
31
ORDER SUBSTITUTING ATTORNEY signed by Magistrate Judge Dale A. Drozd on 09/21/10 ordering defendants Vaughn, Hayward and Ridge hereby substitute attorneys Martha M. Stringer and Kathleen L. Williams in place of the Attorney General. (Plummer, M)
|
|
Filing
28
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Dale A. Drozd on 9/9/2010 DENYING pltf's 17 motion for a TRO; pltf's 19 motion for a TRO, or in the alternative, a preliminary injunction; and pltf's 21 motion "to remove pltf from CDCR" and grant pltf access to the law library. (Yin, K)
|
|
Filing
15
ORDER denying without prejudice 14 Pltf's Motion for TRO, signed by Magistrate Judge Dale A. Drozd on 5/19/10. (Kastilahn, A)
|
|
Filing
9
ORDER DIRECTING MONTHLY PAYMENTS be made from Prison Account of Shaka S. Muhammad signed by Magistrate Judge Dale A. Drozd on 3/29/2010. CDC is to collect monthly payments and fwd to the clerk until the $350 filing fee is paid in full. Clerk is directed to serve this order and copy of pltf's IFP on the Director of CDC. Clerk to also serve Financial w/ a copy of this order. (cc: CDC, Financial)(Yin, K)
|
|
Filing
6
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Dale A. Drozd on 2/11/2010 ORDERING that pltf's 2 application to proceed IFP is DENIED w/out prejudice; pltf to submit w/in 30 days a properly completed ifp application that includes a certified copy of pltf's trust acct statement and prison official's certification; the clerk to send pltf a new ifp application. (Yin, K)
|
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 California Eastern 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.
