Miller v. United States of America

Respondent: United States of America
Petitioner: John J. Miller
Case Number: 0:2013cv02586
Filed: September 19, 2013
Court: Minnesota District Court
Office: DMN Office
County: Olmsted
Referring Judge: Tony N. Leung
Presiding Judge: Ann D. Montgomery
Nature of Suit: General
Cause of Action: 28:2241
Jury Demanded By: None

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed#Document Text
May 16, 2014 20 Opinion or Order of the Court ORDER denying as moot 2 Motion ; denying as moot 6 Motion to Expedite; granting 15 Motion to Dismiss/General; Adopt Report and Recommendation 19 Report and Recommendation. (Written Opinion). Signed by Judge Ann D. Montgomery on 5/16/2014. (GJS)

Access additional case information on PACER

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 Minnesota District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Miller v. United States of America
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Respondent: United States of America
Represented By: Gregory G Brooker
Represented By: Pamela Marentette
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 [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Petitioner: John J. Miller
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 [ 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 were retrieved from PACER, and should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.