Pickett et al v. Nevada Board of Parole Commissioners et al
| Cary Pickett |
| Nevada Board of Parole Commissioners and Nevada Department of Public Safety Division of Parole and Probation |
| 2:2009cv01695 |
| August 31, 2009 |
| US District Court for the District of Nevada |
| Las Vegas Office |
| Clark |
| Lawrence R. Leavitt |
| Philip M. Pro |
| None |
| 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
114
ORDER Denying 97 Plaintiff's Request for Rule 60(b) Relief From a Judgment or Order, Denying 110 Plaintiff's Request for a Review of order by the Magistrate Judge, and Denying as moot 113 Plaintiff's Second Motion to Supplement Briefing. Signed by Judge Philip M. Pro on 1/29/2014. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - EDS)
|
|
Filing
108
ORDER that 105 Motion to Withdraw as Attorney by Mark J Bourassa is GRANTED. The clerk will mail a copy of this order to Cary J. Pickett. FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff's Request to Represent Himself for the Limited Purpose for Relief Under Rule 60(b) 101 and to Supplement Pleadings 102 are DENIED as MOOT. Signed by Magistrate Judge Cam Ferenbach on 1/16/14. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - MMM)
|
|
Filing
95
ORDER Granting Defendants' 75 Motion for Summary Judgment. Plaintiff's 76 Motion for Summary Judgment is Denied, Plaintiff's 81 Motion to Amend/Correct Complaint is Denied, Defendants' 83 Motion in Limine is Denied a s moot, Defendants' 88 Motion to Strike Errata is Denied as moot, and Defendants' 92 Motion to Strike Affidavit is Denied as moot. Judgment is entered in favor of Defendants Nevada Board of Parole Commissioners and Nevada Department of PublicSafety Division of Parole and Probation and against Plaintiff Cary J. Pickett. Signed by Judge Philip M. Pro on 11/25/2013. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - SLD) (Main Document 95 replaced on 11/26/2013) (SLD).
|
|
Filing
69
ORDER allowing the attendance of identified individuals for Settlement Conference. Signed by Magistrate Judge Cam Ferenbach on 1/7/2013. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - SLR)
|
|
Filing
52
ORDER Granting in part and Denying in part 44 Plaintiff's Motion for Sanctions re Discovery. Amended/Supplemental Joint Pretrial Order due by 12/15/2012. Signed by Magistrate Judge Cam Ferenbach on 09/19/2012. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - AC)
|
|
Filing
45
ORDER Referring Case for Settlement Conference. Case is referred to Magistrate Judge Cam Ferenbach for a settlement conference. Signed by Judge Philip M. Pro on 7/17/12. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - ECS)
|
|
Filing
39
ORDER granting in part and denying in part 30 Motion to Compel. (See Order for details). FURTHER ORDERED that plaintiff's request for sanctions is GRANTED. Defendants shall pay plaintiff $1,000 in sanctions within 14 days from the entry of this order. THEREFORE ORDERED that 28 Motion to Compel is DENIED as moot. FURTHER ORDERED that 31 Motion to Extend Discovery Plan and Scheduling Order is GRANTED. Discovery is closed for defendants, and no dispositive motions may be filed. Proposed Joint Pretrial Order due by 7/2/2012. Signed by Magistrate Judge Cam Ferenbach on 4/19/12. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - MMM)
|
|
Filing
17
ORDER denying 14 Motion to Dismiss. Signed by Judge Philip M. Pro on 5/24/2010. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - SD)
|
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 Nevada 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.
