Dumisani v. State of Arizona, et al
| 2:2007cv02514 |
| December 12, 2007 |
| US District Court for the District of Arizona |
| Phoenix Division Office |
| Stephen M McNamee |
| Edward C Voss (PS) |
| Civil Rights: Other |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1983 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
26
ORDER - IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiff's 6/11/08 13 Motion for Remand to State Court is DENIED. Signed by Judge Stephen M McNamee on 10/22/08.(SAT)
|
|
Filing
9
ORDER granting 7 Motion for clarification to the extent that this Order informs plaintiff of the status of this case. Plaintiff has 30 days from the date this Order is filed to file a first amended complaint in compliance with the Courts January 14 , 2008 Order. If Plaintiff fails to timely comply, the Clerk of Court must, without further notice, enter a judgment of dismissal of this action with prejudice that states that the dismissal counts as a strike under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). The Clerk of Court must mail Plaintiff a court-approved form for filing a civil rights complaint by a prisoner.. Signed by Judge Stephen M McNamee on 2/4/08.(DMT, )
|
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 Arizona 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: Dumisani v. State of Arizona, et al | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | 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.
