Anderson v. Arizona Department of Corrections et al
Brian Lyle Anderson |
David Cluff, Ernie Trujillo, Unknown Madrid and Unknown Curran |
2:2011cv00533 |
March 22, 2011 |
US District Court for the District of Arizona |
Phoenix Division Office |
Pinal |
Mark E Aspey |
John W Sedwick |
Prison Condition |
42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 |
Plaintiff |
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
Document Text |
---|
Filing 5 ORDER (Service Packet) Plaintiff's Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis (Doc. 3) is granted. As required by the accompanying Order to the appropriate government agency, Plaintiff must pay the $350.00 filing fee and is not assessed an in itial partial filing fee. Counts I, II, and IV, and Defendants Arizona Department of Corrections, Ryan, Ulibarri, Johnson, Sturm, Mangan, and Vicklund are dismissed without prejudice. Defendants Madrid, Cluff, Curran, and Trujillo must answer Count I II of the Complaint. The Clerk of Court must send Plaintiff a service packet including the Complaint (Doc. 1), this Order, and both summons and request for waiver forms for Defendants Madrid, Cluff, Curran, and Trujillo. Plaintiff must complete1 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 Mark E. Aspey 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). Signed by Judge John W Sedwick on 4/1/11. (KMG) |
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
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.