Mitchell v. Corizon Health Incorporated et al
| Kevin Mitchell |
| Corizon Health Incorporated, Arizona, State of and Unknown Parties |
| 2:2014cv01754 |
| August 5, 2014 |
| US District Court for the District of Arizona |
| Phoenix Division Office |
| Maricopa |
| Bridget S Bade (PS) |
| David G Campbell |
| Prison Condition |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1441 |
| Both |
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
8
ORDER that Count One is dismissed without prejudice as to Defendant Talboy. Defendant Corizon must answer Count One. Defendants Corizon, State of Arizona, and Talboy must answer Count Two. Plaintiff must serve Defendant Talboy or seek a waiver o f service for Defendant Talboy within 120 days of the filing of the Complaint or within 60 days of the filing of this Order, whichever is later. This matter is referred to Magistrate Judge Bridget S. Bade for all pretrial proceedings. Signed by Judge David G Campbell on 1/28/2015. (LFIG)
|
|
Filing
6
ORDER the 1 Complaint is dismissed for failure to state a claim. Plaintiff has 30 days from the date this Order is filed to file a first amended complaint in compliance with this Order. If Plaintiff fails to comply, 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 Judge David G Campbell on 11/3/2014. (LFIG)
|
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.
