Bruce v. Osagie et al
| Antoine Bruce |
| John T. Rathman, Alejo Borrero-Hernande, Lee H. Green, Jose A. Santana, Paul M. Laird, Harrell Watts, David A. Berkebile, L. Robinson and S. Cedeno |
| 1:2014cv02068 |
| July 24, 2014 |
| US District Court for the District of Colorado |
| Denver Office |
| Fremont |
| Boyd N. Boland |
| Prisoner - Civil Rights (U.S. not a defendant) |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights |
| Plaintiff |
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
89
COURTROOM MINUTES/MINUTE ORDER for Status Conference held on 3/23/2016 before Magistrate Judge Nina Y. Wang. A proposed Scheduling Order is due on or before April 13, 2016. Plaintiff's Oral Motion to Appoint Counsel is DENIED. Plaintiff's Motion for Reconsideration 84 filed March 17, 2016 is DENIED. All mail sent from the Court to Mr. Bruce shall be marked as Legal Mail. FTR: Courtroom C-204. (bsimm, )
|
|
Filing
65
ORDER by Magistrate Judge Nina Y. Wang on 12/1/15 granting in part and denying in part 54 Motion to Compel; granting in part and denying in part 59 Motion for Order; granting in part and denying in part 61 Motion to Clarify. The Clerk of th e Court is DIRECTED to send a copy of the docket to Plaintiff along with a copy of the following documents [#42, #48]. The Clerk of the Court is further DIRECTED TO SERVE Defendant with a copy of the Motion for TRO/PI [#35] and the Order to Draw in P art and to Dismiss in Part [#42]. Defendant shall file a Response to the allegations contained in the Motion for TRO/PI [#35] at page 3, paragraph 4 on or before December 18, 2015 and no further extensions will be granted. Plaintiffs request for appo intment of counsel is DENIED without prejudice at this time as premature and duplicative of his previously denied motion for appointment of counsel, see [#3, #5]. A Status Conference is set for 12/30/2015 at 10:00 AM in Courtroom C204 before Magistrate Judge Nina Y. Wang. 9. The Clerk of the Court is instructed to send a copy of this Order to the following: CASE MANAGER FOR ANTOINE BRUCE #35363-007, FLORENCE ADMAX U.S. PENITENTIARY. PO BOX 8500, FLORENCE, CO 81226.(nmarb, )
|
|
Filing
37
ORDER denying 7 Motion and Affidavit for Leave to Proceed Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915, and 36 Motion to Amend, by Judge Lewis T. Babcock on 5/20/15. 35 Motion for a Temporary Restraining Order and for a Preliminary Injunction and 34 Motion and Affidavit for Leave to Proceed Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915 are construed as a Response to the Order to Show Cause.(dkals, )
|
|
Filing
28
ORDER granting 27 MOTION for Reconsideration by Judge Lewis T. Babcock on 1/28/15. (dkals, )
|
|
Filing
22
ORDER dismissing this action without prejudice, and denying leave to proceed in forma pampers on appeal, by Judge Lewis T. Babcock on 11/14/14. (dkals, )
|
|
Filing
18
MINUTE ORDER by Magistrate Judge Boyd N. Boland on 09/12/14 DENYING as moot 16 Motion to Amend, and 17 Motion of "Compelment". (nmarb, )
|
|
Filing
15
MINUTE ORDER by Magistrate Judge Boyd N. Boland on 09/11/14 DENYING as moot 13 Motion to Amend; and 14 Motion of "Compelment". Plaintiff is directed that the only proper filing at this time is an Amended Complaint that complies with the September 8 Order. (nmarb, )
|
|
Filing
12
ORDER by Magistrate Judge Boyd N. Boland on 09/08/14 Directing Plaintiff To File Amended Complaint and Order denying as moot 6 Motion to Compel; denying as unnecessary 8 Motion to Amend/Correct/Modify, and denying as moot 10 Motion for Supplemental Complaint. (nmarb, )
|
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 Colorado 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.
