Jose v. Thomas et al

Plaintiff: Ronald N Jose
Defendant: Todd Thomas, Timothy Dobson and Benjamin Griego
Case Number: 2:2011cv00486
Filed: March 14, 2011
Court: Arizona District Court
Office: Phoenix Division Office
County: Pinal
Referring Judge: Jay R Irwin
Presiding Judge: G Murray Snow
Nature of Suit: Prison Condition
Cause of Action: 42:1983
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
July 11, 2012 80 Opinion or Order of the Court ORDER denying 75 Motion for Reconsideration. (See document for further details). Signed by Judge G Murray Snow on 7/10/12.(LAD)
June 11, 2012 73 Opinion or Order of the Court ORDER - The reference to the Magistrate Judge is withdrawn as to Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 53); Plaintiff's Motion for an Extension of Time to File Dispositive Motions (Doc. 70); and Plaintiff Motion for Reconsideration (Doc. 72). Plaintiff's Motion for an Extension of Time to File Dispositive Motions (Doc. 70) is denied as moot; and Plaintiff Motion fo r Reconsideration (Doc. 72) is denied. Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 53) is granted as f ollows: (a) Plaintiff's claim for extreme idleness and lack of programs; that clothing provided in segregation is limited to only one change of clothes, a boxer and T-shirt; lack of access to a storage locker; and denial of sun block, lip balm, lotion, and dental floss,unconstitutional lighting and denial of dental floss are dismissed without prejudice for failure to exhaust administrative remedies; and (b) the remaining claims are dismissed with prejudice. The action is terminated, and the Clerk of Court must enter judgment accordingly. For the reasons set forth herein, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3), an appeal from the judgment in this action would not be taken in good faith. Signed by Judge G Murray Snow on 6/11/12.(LAD)
March 31, 2011 8 Opinion or Order of the Court ORDER (Service Packet) - The Clerk of Court must send Plaintiff a service packet including the First Amended Complaint (Doc. 7), this Order, and both summons and request for waiver forms for Defendants Thomas, Griego, and Dobson. This matter is refer red to Magistrate Judge Jay R. Irwin pursuant to Rules 72.1 and 72.2 of the Local Rules of Civil Procedure for all pretrial proceedings as authorized under 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). (See document for further details). Signed by Judge G Murray Snow on 3/31/11. (LAD)

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: Jose v. Thomas et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Ronald N Jose
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 ]
Defendant: Todd Thomas
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 ]
Defendant: Timothy Dobson
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 ]
Defendant: Benjamin Griego
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 should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?