Willie Weaver v. California State Prison Lancaster First Watch et al
| Willie Weaver |
| California State Prison Lancaster First Watch and First Watch Sergent |
| 2:2023cv01086 |
| February 13, 2023 |
| US District Court for the Central District of California |
| Charles F Eick |
| Stephen V Wilson |
| 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 March 30, 2023. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 5
MINUTES IN CHAMBERS ORDER DISMISSING ACTION by Judge Stephen V. Wilson. On February 14, 2023, the Court issued a letter advising pro se plaintiff that he did not submit the appropriate filing fee or file a Request to Proceed without Prepayment of Filing Fees with Declaration in Support (Form CV-60P). Plaintiff was given thirty days, to and including March 16, 2023, pay the filing fee or file the Request. To date, plaintiff has failed to comply. The case is dismissed. (Case Terminated. Made JS-6.) (aco)
|
| Filing 4 NOTICE OF ASSIGNMENT to District Judge Stephen V. Wilson and referred to Magistrate Judge Charles F. Eick. (car) |
| Filing 3 Notice of Deficiency. On 2/13/2023, the Court received, through the United States Mail, a complaint arising under 42 U.S.C. 1983. Please be advised that the Court and California State Prison, Los Angeles County (LAC) are participants in a pilot project that requires all such documents to be scanned and submitted to the Court by electronic mail, General Order No. 18-02. Submission of this complaint by U.S. Mail violates the terms of General Order 18-02. To submit a complaint arising under 42 U.S.C. 1983 to the Court for filing, you must present it to designated LAC staff for scanning and emailing to the Court. If you are unable to comply with these procedures, you must submit with your complaint a motion for leave to file your documents by U.S. Mail that demonstrates good cause for your inability to submit your documents to the Court electronically. You must now re-submit your complaint to the Court electronically. You must submit for scanning an exact copy of the complaint you previously mailed to the Court; it cannot be modified in any way. You must include this notice on top of the complaint submitted for scanning. If your complaint is received in the Court's electronic mail box within two weeks from the date of this letter, your complaint will be deemed filed as of the date that appears on the envelope you originally sent via U.S. Mail. (SEE DOCUMENT FOR FURTHER DETAILS) (car) |
| Filing 2 Notice Re: Discrepancies in Filing of Prisoner Civil Rights Complaint (CV-93P). Upon submission of your civil rights complaint, it was noted that you did not pay the appropriate filing fee. If you are unable to pay the entire filing fee at this time, you must sign and complete the Request to Proceed Without Prepayment of Filing Fees with Declaration in Support form (CV-60P) attached. You may return your fee waiver and/or payment to any of the Courthouses listed on this notice. If you do not respond within THIRTY DAYS from the date below, your action may be dismissed. Re: Complaint (Prisoner Civil Rights) #1 (car) |
| Filing 1 CIVIL RIGHTS COMPLAINT filed against Defendants pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 1983. Case assigned to Judge Stephen V. Wilson and referred to Magistrate Judge Charles F. Eick, filed by Plaintiff Willie Weaver. (car) |
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.
