In re: Henry Lagmay
| Henry Lagmay |
| 1:2015cv00166 |
| May 6, 2015 |
| US District Court for the District of Hawaii |
| Hawaii Office |
| Honolulu |
| RICHARD L. PUGLISI |
| DERRICK K. WATSON |
| Prisoner: Civil Rights |
| 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
53
ORDER Denying 51 Motion for Reconsideration filed by Henry Lagmay. Signed by JUDGE DERRICK K. WATSON on 10/13/2015. ~ Plaintiff sets forth no clear or convincing evidence showing that anyone perpetrated fraud or prevented him from amending his complaint and prosecuting this action. There is no persuasive reason to reconsider the decision to dismiss this action with prejudice, and Plaintiff's Motion for Reconsideration is DENIED. The Clerk shall terminate this action. (ecs, )CERTIFICATE OF SERVICEParticipants registered to receive electronic notifications received this document electronically at the e-mail address listed on the Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF). Participants not registered to receive electronic notifications were served by first class mail on the date of this docket entry
|
|
Filing
46
DISMISSAL ORDER. Signed by JUDGE DERRICK K. WATSON on 9/21/2015. This action is DISMISSED with prejudice and the Clerk is DIRECTED to enter judgment accordingly pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b). Plaintiff is notified that this dismi ssal shall count as a strike under 28 U.S.C. §1915(g), unless later overturned on appeal. See Coleman v. Tollefson, 135 S. Ct. 1759, 1763 (2015). Any pending motions are DENIED. (ecs, )CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE< /center>Participants registered to receive electronic notifications received this document electronically at the e-mail address listed on the Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF). Participants not registered to receive electronic notifications were served by first class mail on the date of this docket entry
|
|
Filing
40
ORDER EXTENDING TIME. Signed by JUDGE DERRICK K. WATSON on 8/18/2015. (1) Plaintiff is GRANTED until on or before SEPTEMBER 14, 2015 to file an amended complaint. The amended complaint must allege this court's jurisdiction an d venue, identify the defendants in the caption and within each claim, explain defendants' capacity for suit and personal involvement in his claims, and be set forth in separately numbered paragraphs explaining how each defendant personally vi olated Plaintiff's civil rights. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 10; see also 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff must explain his request for relief and sign the amended complaint. In this instance, Plaintiff need not provide copies of the amended complain t; he will be sent a complete, endorsed copy of the amended complaint upon its receipt at court. (2) Plaintiff is NOTIFIED again that, until he submits a legible, signed amended complaint set forth on this court's prisoner civil rights form , the court will not consider other documents, motions, pleadings, notices, or miscellaneous filings. (3) The Clerk is DIRECTED to send Plaintiff a prisoner civil rights complaint form, a copy of Rules 10-12, 18, and 20 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, and another copy of the May 15, 2015 Order Dismissing Complaint With Leave to Amend, Doc. No. 4 . (4) The Clerk is further DIRECTED to send a copy of this Order to the Halawa Correctional Facility Acting Warden Frances Sequeira, the Director of theHawaii Department of Public Safety Nolan Espinda, and the Department of PublicSafety Litigation Coordinator Shelley Nobriga, Esq., to alert them to Plaintiff's allegations regarding law library access and copies. Related docs 38 , 4 , 35 , 36 (ecs, )CERTIFICATE OF SERVICEParticipants registered to receive electronic notifications received this document electronically at the e-mail address listed on the Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF). Participants not registered to receive electronic notifications were served by first class mail on the date of this docket entry. Documents and parties served as directed.
|
|
Filing
13
ORDER Denying 10 Motion to Appoint a Representative, Next Friend, or Guardian Ad Litem. Signed by JUDGE DERRICK K. WATSON on 6/9/2015. ~ Plaintiff's Motion to Enforce Rule 17 is DENIED without prejudice. Plaintiff is reminded t hat the amended complaint and civil filing fee or in forma pauperis application remain due on or before June 19, 2015. Failure to complywith this deadline may result in dismissal of this action for failure to pay,prosecute, or follow a court order. Plaintiff is further notified that he may voluntarily dismiss this actionwithout payment or penalty by notifying the Court in writing on or before June 19, 2015. (ecs, )CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE Participants registered to receive electronic notifications received this document electronically at the e-mail address listed on the Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF). Participants not registered to receive electronic notifications were served by first class mail on the date of this docket entry
|
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 Hawaii 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
| Search for this case: In re: Henry Lagmay | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Petitioner: Henry Lagmay | |
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Finance | [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
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.
