Arroyo v. Emondi et al
| Eivar Arroyo |
| Al Emondi, Gaurav Sharma, Patrick Ganzer, Sakhrat Khizroev, Jacob Robinson, Patrick Connolly, David Blodgett, Pulkit Grover, Krishnan Thygarajan, Michael D Zmura, Thomas Naselaris and Ping Liang |
| 2:2022cv00698 |
| January 27, 2022 |
| US District Court for the Central District of California |
| Karen L Stevenson |
| Otis D Wright |
| Prisoner: Civil Rights |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on February 3, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 4
ORDER DENYING REQUEST TO PROCEED WITHOUT PREPAYMENT OF FILING FEES. CASE IS DISMISSED IMMEDIATELY #2 by Judge Otis D. Wright, II. MD JS-6, Case Terminated. (lc)
|
| Filing 3 NOTICE OF ASSIGNMENT to District Judge Otis D. Wright, II and referred to Magistrate Judge Karen L. Stevenson. (et) |
| Filing 2 REQUEST to Proceed Without Prepayment of Filing Fees with Declaration in Support filed by Plaintiff Eivar Arroyo. (et) |
| Filing 1 CIVIL RIGHTS COMPLAINT filed against Defendants David Blodgett, Patrick Connolly, Michael D Zmura, Al Emondi, Patrick Ganzer, Pulkit Grover, Sakhrat Khizroev, Ping Liang, Thomas Naselaris, Jacob Robinson, Gaurav Sharma, Krishnan Thygarajan pursuant to 42:1983. Case assigned to Judge Otis D. Wright, II and referred to Magistrate Judge Karen L. Stevenson., filed by Plaintiff Eivar Arroyo. (et) |
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 California Central 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.
