Cooke v. Federal Bureau of Investigation et al
| Roland Cooke |
| Federal Bureau of Investigation, Internal Revenue Service and United States of America |
| 3:2018cv08211 |
| September 7, 2018 |
| US District Court for the District of Arizona |
| Diane J Humetewa |
| Civil Rights: Other |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on September 20, 2018. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 9 Notice filed by Roland Cooke: Proof of Service re: complaint/civil cover sheet/summons/notice re MIDP/orders upon Federal Bureau of Investigation, Internal Revenue Service, United States of America on 9/17/18. (GMP) *Modified on 10/15/2018 to correct event (GMP). |
Filing 8
ORDER/NOTICE PURSUANT TO FED. R.CIV.P.4(M): ORDERED directing the Clerk of Court to terminate any or all Defendant(s) in this matter, without further notice or order from the Court, that have not been served within the time required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(m) on December 10, 2018. Signed by Judge Diane J Humetewa on 9/11/2018. (LFIG)
|
|
Filing 7
ORDER that motions pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b) are discouraged if the defect can be cured by filing an amended pleading. The parties must meet and confer prior to the filing of such motions to determine whether it can be avoided. ORDERED that Plaintiff serve a copy of this Order upon Defendant and file a notice of service. ORDERED directing any party appearing pro se to become familiar with the Local Rules and the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. See Order for details. Signed by Judge Diane J Humetewa on 9/11/2018. (LFIG)
|
| Filing 6 NOTICE TO THE PARTIES - The Court is participating in the Mandatory Initial Discovery Pilot (MIDP) and this case is subject to that pilot. The key features and deadlines are set forth in the attached Notice which includes General Order 17-08. Also attached is a checklist for use by the parties. All parties must respond to the mandatory initial discovery requests set forth in the General Order before initiating any further discovery in this case. Please note: The discovery obligations in the General Order supersede the disclosures required by Rule 26(a)(1). Any party seeking affirmative relief must serve a copy of the attached documents (Notice to Parties, including General Order 17-08 and MIDP Checklist) on each new party when the Complaint, Counterclaim, Crossclaim, or Third-Party Complaint is served. (ATD) |
| Filing 5 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. (ATD) |
| Filing 4 Summons Issued as to Federal Bureau of Investigation, Internal Revenue Service. (Attachments: #1 Summons) (ATD) *** IMPORTANT: When printing the summons, select "Document and stamps" or "Document and comments" for the seal to appear on the document. |
| Filing 3 Filing fee paid, receipt number PHX200363. This case has been assigned to the Honorable Diane J Humetewa. All future pleadings or documents should bear the correct case number: CV-18-08211-PCT-DJH. Notice of Availability of Magistrate Judge to Exercise Jurisdiction form attached. (ATD) |
| Filing 2 SUMMONS Submitted by Roland Cooke. (Attachments: #1 Summons) (ATD) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT. Filing fee received: $ 400.00, receipt number PHX200363 filed by Roland Cooke. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet) (ATD) |
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.
