Inzunza v. Hacker-Agnew et al
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
|Date Filed||#||Document Text|
|June 12, 2017
ORDER ACCEPTING AND ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION 34 - The Petition in this case is dismissed, without prejudice, and the Clerk of the Court shall enter judgment accordingly. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, in the event Petitioner files an appea l, issuance of a certificate of appealability is denied because jurists of reason would not find this Court's procedural ruling debatable. See generally Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000). (See document for further details). Signed by Senior Judge James A Teilborg on 6/12/17. (LAD)
|November 8, 2016
ORDER denying 13 the requests contained in Petitioner's "Notice of Indigency"; denying 14 Petitioner's "Motion for Discovery as Provided by Rule 26 Federal Rule's [sic] of Civil Procedure"; denying 16 Petiti oner's Motion to Appoint Counsel; and denying 17 Petitioner's "Motion to Amend". IT IS FURTHER ORDERED granting 20 Petitioner's "Motion to Amend and Request for Relief" and denying 24 Petitioner's " Motion to Amend/Reply". Petitioner's Motion (Doc. 20 ) and its attached documents are deemed a supplement to the Petition (Doc. 1 ). For clarity of the record, the Clerk is directed to amend the docket accordingly. The Clerk shall strik e the duplicative "Motion to Amend/Reply" filed at (Doc. 25 ). Respondents may file a Supplemental Limited Answer by November 30, 2016. Petitioner may file a Reply no later than thirty days after service of Respondents' Supplemental Limited Answer. Signed by Magistrate Judge Eileen S Willett on 11/7/14.(LSP)
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
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?