Cochran v. Rao

Plaintiff: Howard Cochran
Defendant: Sudha Rao
Case Number: 2:2011cv01365
Filed: July 8, 2011
Court: Arizona District Court
Office: Phoenix Division Office
County: Maricopa
Referring Judge: Jay R Irwin (PS)
Presiding Judge: Robert C Broomfield
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
June 3, 2013 70 Opinion or Order of the Court ORDER the reference to the Magistrate is withdrawn as to the Motion for Reconsideration 69 . ORDER denying without prejudice 69 Motion for Reconsideration. The Clerk of Court must correct the docket entry to reflect that the Motion for Reconsider ation is for reconsideration of the Order and Mandate from the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit 67 and 68 . The Clerk of Court must provide Plaintiff with copies of the Order and Mandate 67 and 68 . Signed by Senior Judge Robert C Broomfield on 5/30/13.(TLJ)
March 26, 2013 62 Opinion or Order of the Court ORDER the reference to the Magistrate Judge is withdrawn as to Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment 42 and Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment 44 . ORDER granting 42 Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment; denying 44 Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment. The action is terminated, and the Clerk of Court must enter judgment accordingly. Signed by Senior Judge Robert C Broomfield on 3/26/13.(TLJ)
April 26, 2012 18 Opinion or Order of the Court ORDER FOR PAYMENT OF REMAINING BALANCE OF INMATE FILING FEE be made from Prison Account of Howard Cochran. Signed by Senior Judge Robert C Broomfield on 4/25/12. (TLJ)
November 21, 2011 10 Opinion or Order of the Court ORDER (Service Packet) - The Clerk of Court must send Plaintiff a service packet including the Second Amended Complaint (Doc. 9), this Order, and both summons and request for waiver forms for Defendant Rao. This matter is referred 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 full details). Signed by Judge Robert C Broomfield on 11/18/11. (LAD)
September 1, 2011 8 Opinion or Order of the Court ORDER the First Amended Complaint is dismissed for failure to state a claim 7 . Plaintiff has 30 days from the date this Order is filed to file a second amended complaint. If Plaintiff fails to comply, the Clerk of Court must enter a judgment of dis missal with prejudice that states that the dismissal may count as a strike under 28:1915(g). The Clerk of Court must mail Plaintiff a court-approved form for filing a civil rights complaint by a prisoner. Signed by Judge Robert C Broomfield on 9/1/11. (TLJ)
July 18, 2011 6 Opinion or Order of the Court ORDER Directing Monthly Payments be made from Prison Account of Howard Cochran. Signed by Judge Robert C Broomfield on 07/18/11. (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: Cochran v. Rao
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Sudha Rao
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 ]
Plaintiff: Howard Cochran
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?