Bowler #234066 v. Ryan et al

Plaintiff: Joshua Erik Bowler
Defendant: Unknown Parties and Charles L Ryan
Case Number: 2:2013cv00046
Filed: January 8, 2013
Court: Arizona District Court
Office: Phoenix Division Office
County: Pinal
Referring Judge: James F Metcalf (PS)
Presiding Judge: Robert C Broomfield
Nature of Suit: Prison Condition
Cause of Action: 28:1331
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
September 19, 2013 16 Opinion or Order of the Court ORDER - Plaintiff's motion for appointment of counsel is denied. (Doc. 15 .) Plaintiff's motion for an extension of time is granted to the extent set forth below. (Doc. 14 .) Plaintiff is granted an additional 30 days from the filing date of this Order in which to file a second amended complaint in compliance with the August 12, 2013 Order, doc. 13 . If Plaintiff fails to file an amended complaint within the extension granted herein, the Clerk of Court must, without further notice, enter a judgment of dismissal of this action with prejudice that states that the dismissal may count as a "strike" under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). Signed by Senior Judge Robert C Broomfield on 9/19/13. (LAD)
August 12, 2013 13 Opinion or Order of the Court ORDER - The First Amended Complaint (Doc. 11 ) is dismissed for failure to state a claim. Plaintiff has 30 days from the date this Order is filed to file a second amended complaint in compliance with this Order. If Plaintiff fails to file a secon d amended complaint within 30 days, the Clerk of Court must, without further notice, enter a judgment of dismissal of this action with prejudice that states that the dismissal may count as a "strike" under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). (See document for full details). Signed by Senior Judge Robert C Broomfield on 8/12/13. (LAD)
April 22, 2013 10 Opinion or Order of the Court ORDER denying 8 Motion for Discovery; granting 9 Motion for Extension of Time to Amend. Plaintiff is granted an additional 30 days from the filing date of this Order in which to file a first amended complaint in compliance with the March 26, 2013 Order, doc. 6 . If Plaintiff fails to file an amended complaint within the extension granted herein, the Clerk of Court must, without further notice, enter a judgment of dismissal of this action with prejudice that states that the dismissal may count as a "strike" under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). Signed by Senior Judge Robert C Broomfield on 4/22/13. (LAD)
March 26, 2013 7 Opinion or Order of the Court ORDER Directing Monthly Payments be made from Prison Account of Joshua Erik Bowler. Signed by Senior Judge Robert C Broomfield on 3/26/13. (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: Bowler #234066 v. Ryan et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Unknown Parties
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: Charles L Ryan
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: Joshua Erik Bowler
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?