DeRoche v. Adu-Tutu et al

DeRoche v. Adu-Tutu et al

Plaintiff:	Joshua DeRoche
Defendant:	Michael Adu-Tutu
Case Number:	2:2011cv00302
Filed:	February 15, 2011
Court:	US District Court for the District of Arizona
Office:	Phoenix Division Office
County:	Pinal
Presiding Judge:	David G Campbell
Presiding Judge:	Jay R Irwin
Nature of Suit:	Prison Condition
Cause of Action:	42 U.S.C. § 1983
Jury Demanded By:	Plaintiff

Follow case documents by RSS

Available Case Documents

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

Date Filed	Document Text
October 18, 2011	Filing 26 ORDER that the reference to the Magistrate Judge is withdrawn as to Plaintiff's Motion for Preliminary Injunction and it is denied (Doc. 10). Signed by Judge David G Campbell on 10/18/2011.(KMG)
April 13, 2011	Filing 5 ORDER that Plaintiff's 3 MOTION (application) for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis is granted. Defendants ADOC and Members of the ADOC's Central Office Hepatitis C Committee are dismissed from this action for failure to state a claim u pon which relief may be granted. Defendant Michael Adu-Tutu must answer the Complaint (Doc. 1). The Clerk of Court must send to Plaintiff a service packet including the Complaint, this Order, and both summons and request for waiver forms for Defendan t Michael Adu-Tutu. Plaintiff must complete and return the service packet to the Clerk of Court within 21 days of the date of filing of this Order. This matter is referred to Magistrate Judge Jay R. Irwin for all pretrial proceedings as authorized under 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Signed by Judge David G Campbell on 04/13/11. (NOTE: see attached pdf for complete details) (ESL)

Date Filed

Document Text

October 18, 2011

Filing 26 ORDER that the reference to the Magistrate Judge is withdrawn as to Plaintiff's Motion for Preliminary Injunction and it is denied (Doc. 10). Signed by Judge David G Campbell on 10/18/2011.(KMG)

April 13, 2011

Filing 5 ORDER that Plaintiff's 3 MOTION (application) for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis is granted. Defendants ADOC and Members of the ADOC's Central Office Hepatitis C Committee are dismissed from this action for failure to state a claim u pon which relief may be granted. Defendant Michael Adu-Tutu must answer the Complaint (Doc. 1). The Clerk of Court must send to Plaintiff a service packet including the Complaint, this Order, and both summons and request for waiver forms for Defendan t Michael Adu-Tutu. Plaintiff must complete and return the service packet to the Clerk of Court within 21 days of the date of filing of this Order. This matter is referred to Magistrate Judge Jay R. Irwin for all pretrial proceedings as authorized under 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Signed by Judge David G Campbell on 04/13/11. (NOTE: see attached pdf for complete details) (ESL)

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

Search for this case: DeRoche v. Adu-Tutu et al
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Plaintiff: Joshua DeRoche
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 ]
Defendant: Michael Adu-Tutu
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.

Why Is My Information Online?