Stanberry-Sproles v. Arizona Department of Child Safety et al
| Aneta Stanberry-Sproles |
| Arizona Department of Child Safety and Ronic Psychological Services |
| 2:2022cv01496 |
| September 6, 2022 |
| US District Court for the District of Arizona |
| Michael T Morrissey |
| Civil Rights: Other |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1331 Fed. Question |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on November 14, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 13
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION that Plaintiff's complaint (doc. #1 ) be DISMISSED WITHOUT LEAVE TO AMEND. IT IS FURTHER RECOMMENDED Plaintiff's other pending motions (docs. #8 , #10 , #12 ) be DENIED as moot. This Report and Recommendation is not an order that is immediately appealable to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. Any notice of appeal under Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 4(a)(1) should not be filed until entry of the District Court's judgment. The parties have fourteen days from the date of service of this Report and Recommendation's copy to file specific, written objections with the Court. See 28 U.S.C. 636(b)(1); Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(a), 6(b) and 72. Thereafter, the parties have fourteen days to respond to the objections. See document for complete details. Signed by Magistrate Judge Michael T Morrissey on 10/19/2022. (WLP)
|
| Filing 14 NOTICE by Aneta Stanberry-Sproles. (WLP) |
| Filing 12 SEALED MOTION to Return Permanent Custody and Parental Rights by Aneta Stanberry-Sproles. (MAP) |
| Filing 11 NOTICE by Aneta Stanberry-Sproles. (CLM) |
| Filing 10 MOTION to Reverse Lower Court Decision by Aneta Stanberry-Sproles. (KJ) |
| Filing 9 REQUEST BY NON-PRISONER PRO SE PARTY FOR ELECTRONIC NOTICING filed by Aneta Stanberry-Sproles. Pro se parties must promptly notify the Clerks Office, in writing, if there is a change in designated e-mail address or mailing address. (WLP) |
| Filing 8 MOTION to Return Custody and Cease Adoption Proceedings by Aneta Stanberry-Sproles. (WLP) |
| Filing 7 Agreement to Magistrate Judge Jurisdiction. Party agrees to Magistrate Judge Jurisdiction. This is a TEXT ENTRY ONLY. There is no PDF document associated with this entry. (MAP) |
|
Filing 5
ORDER: Plaintiff's application to proceed in District Court without paying fees or costs #2 is GRANTED. Plaintiff is responsible for service of the summons and complaint on Defendants under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4. Plaintiff shall file an amended complaint properly alleging federal subject matter jurisdiction no later than October 7, 2022, or this case may be dismissed without prejudice. Signed by Magistrate Judge Michael T Morrissey on 9/09/2022. (REK)
|
| Filing 4 NOTICE TO SELF-REPRESENTED LITIGANT re informational documents attached: (1) Notice to Self-Represented Litigant, (2) Federal Court Self-Service Clinic Flyer, (3) Fed. R. Civ. P. 5.2, and (4) Notice and Request re Electronic Noticing. (LAD) |
| Filing 3 This case has been assigned to the Honorable Michael T Morrissey. All future pleadings or documents should bear the correct case number: CV-22-01496-PHX-MTM. Magistrate Election form attached. (Attachments: #1 Instructions)(LAD) |
| Filing 2 APPLICATION to Proceed in District Court Without Prepaying Fees or Costs by Aneta Stanberry-Sproles. (LAD) (5 pages) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT filed by Aneta Stanberry-Sproles. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit, #2 Envelope)(LAD) (11 pages) |
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 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.
