Hatten v. Arizona Department of Corrections et al
| Christian Blu Hatten |
| Protective Custody Unit, Robert Patton, Marlene Coffey, Keith Smith, Charles L Ryan, Protective Segregation Committee, Arizona Department of Corrections and Stacy Crabtree |
| 2:2013cv01362 |
| July 8, 2013 |
| US District Court for the District of Arizona |
| Phoenix Division Office |
| Yuma |
| Michelle H Burns (PS) |
| Robert C Broomfield |
| Prisoner: Prison Condition |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights |
| Plaintiff |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
5
ORDER Plaintiff's Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis (Doc. 2 ) is denied without prejudice. Within 30 days of the date this Order is filed, Plaintiff must either pay the $400.00 filing and administrative fees or file a complete Appli cation to Proceed In Forma Pauperis and a certified six-month trust account statement. If Plaintiff fails to either pay the $400.00 filing and administrative fees or file a complete Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis within 30 days, the Cl erk of Court must enter a judgment of dismissal of this action without prejudice and without further notice to Plaintiff. The Clerk of the Court must mail Plaintiff a court-approved form for filing an Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis (Non-Habeas). Signed by Senior Judge Robert C Broomfield on 10/23/2013. (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.
