Kemper v. Pie, et al.
| Winston Kemper |
| Crosson and Pie |
| 2:2014cv00305 |
| January 30, 2014 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of California |
| Sacramento Office |
| XX US, Outside State |
| Kendall J. Newman |
| 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
55
FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 8/10/2016 RECOMMENDING defendants' 40 , 49 motions to dismiss be granted, and this action be dismissed without prejudice. Referred to Judge Troy L. Nunley; Objections to F&R due within 14 days. (Yin, K)
|
|
Filing
52
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 06/10/16 ordering that, within fourteen days from the date of this order, plaintiff shall file an opposition, if any, to the motion to dismiss. (Plummer, M)
|
|
Filing
45
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 2/26/2016 ORDERING, within 30 days, plaintiff shall file an opposition, if any, to the 40 motion to dismiss. (Yin, K)
|
|
Filing
44
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 12/18/15 denying 37 Motion to Appoint Counsel. (Plummer, M)
|
|
Filing
35
ORDER to SHOW CAUSE signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 08/20/15 ordering that plaintiff show cause within 14 days why defendant Dr. Pie should not be dismissed from this action without prejudice. (Plummer, M)
|
|
Filing
34
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 6/29/15 DENYING 32 Motion for Sanctions. (Dillon, M)
|
|
Filing
25
ORDER to SHOW CAUSE signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 10/28/14 ordering that within 30 days, plaintiff shall show cause why this action should not be dismissed without prejudice based on plaintiff's admitted failure to exhaust administrative remedies prior to filing suit in federal court. (Plummer, M)
|
|
Filing
23
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 9/10/2014 DISMISSING 22 Plaintiff's Amended Complaint. Within 30 days from the date of this order, plaintiff shall complete the attached Notice of Amendment and submit it to the court along with the Second Amended Complaint. (Donati, J)
|
|
Filing
21
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 8/15/14 ORDERING that 19 Motion to appoint counsel is DENIED without prejudice.(Dillon, M)
|
|
Filing
17
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 7/23/14 ORDERING that this action is DISMISSED without prejudice. CASE CLOSED. (Dillon, M)
|
|
Filing
16
ORDER to SHOW CAUSE signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 6/17/14 ORDERING that plaintiff show cause, within 21 days, why this action should not be dismissed without prejudice.(Dillon, M)
|
|
Filing
13
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 5/5/2014 GRANTING plaintiff 30 days to pay the $400.00 filing fee; plaintiff's failure to comply will result in the dismissal of this action.(Yin, K)
|
|
Filing
10
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 2/7/14 ORDERING that Plaintiff shall submit, within thirty days from the date of this order, an affidavit in support of his request to proceed in forma pauperis on the form provided by the Cle rk of Court, or the required fees in the amount of $400.00; plaintiffs failure to comply with this order will result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed; and the Clerk of the Court is directed to send plaintiff a new Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis By a Prisoner.(Dillon, M)
|
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.
