Avila v. Cate et al
| Perry Robert Avila |
| Matthew Cate, W. J. Sullivan, F. Gonzalez, M. Carrasco, D. Zanchi, D. Meadows, J. Jones, J. Peterson and M. Junios |
| 1:2009cv00918 |
| May 26, 2009 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of California |
| Fresno Office |
| Kern |
| Sandra M. Snyder |
| None |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights |
| None |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
113
ORDER Withdrawing 106 Findings and Recommendations Dated November 23, 2015; FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS that Defendants' 22 MOTION for SUMMARY JUDGMENT be Granted, signed by Magistrate Judge Sheila K. Oberto on 9/9/16. Referred to Judge O'Neill. Objections to F&R Due Within Fifteen Days. (Gonzalez, R)
|
|
Filing
106
FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS Recommending Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment be Denied 22 , signed by Magistrate Judge Sheila K. Oberto on 11/20/15. Referred to Judge O'Neill; 15-Day Deadline. (Verduzco, M)
|
|
Filing
92
ORDER Following In Camera Review of Documents Responsive to Third Party Document Production Requests 2 and 3 80 ; Third Party Document Production Deadline: 20 Days; Plaintiff's Deadline to Respond to MSJ: 30 Days From Date of Production, signed by Magistrate Judge Sheila K. Oberto on 2/25/15. (Hellings, J)
|
|
Filing
91
ORDER DENYING Plaintiff's Motion for Reconsideration 89 , signed by District Judge Lawrence J. O'Neill on 2/21/15. (Hellings, J)
|
|
Filing
80
ORDER (1) DISCHARGING Order to Show Cause Re Contempt, (2) DENYING Motion to Modify Subpoenas as Untimely, and (3) REQUIRING CDCR and CCI to Submit Certain Documents for In Camera Review 57 , 62 , and 63 , signed by Magistrate Judge Sheila K. Oberto on 2/5/14: Thirty-Day Deadline. (Hellings, J)
|
|
Filing
77
ORDER Granting 75 Plaintiff's Motion for Extension of Time to File Status Report, Nunc Pro Tunc to September 13, 2013, signed by Magistrate Judge Sheila K. Oberto on 10/4/13. (Gonzalez, R)
|
|
Filing
71
ORDER STRIKING 69 Unsigned Filing signed by Magistrate Judge Sheila K. Oberto on 8/12/2013. (Jessen, A)
|
|
Filing
62
ORDER DENYING Motion for Reconsideration With Prejudice, and REFERRING Matter Back to Magistrate Judge 58 THIRTY-DAY DEADLINE, signed by District Judge Lawrence J. O'Neill on 6/6/13: CDCR and CCI are required to comply with Judge Oberto's order, with those deadlines commencing upon service of this order. (Hellings, J)
|
|
Filing
57
ORDER granting 51 Motion to Compel signed by Magistrate Judge Sheila K. Oberto on 1/31/2013. (Lundstrom, T)
|
|
Filing
49
ORDER Denying Plaintiff's Motion For Sanctions Against Defendants Under Rule 37(B)(2) And Denying Motion To Modify Scheduling Order As Untimely (Doc. 42 ), ORDER Granting Plaintiff Thirty Days Within Which To File A Rule 45 Motion To Compel Production By CDCR And CCI, signed by Magistrate Judge Sheila K. Oberto on 7/18/2012. (Fahrney, E)
|
|
Filing
45
ORDER CONTINUING DEFENDANTS' 22 MOTION for SUMMARY JUDGMENT from Court's Calendar until Motion is submitted pursuant to Local Rule 230(L), signed by District Judge Lawrence J. O'Neill on 03/19/2012. (Martin-Gill, S)
|
|
Filing
41
ORDER Requiring Plaintiff to File Status Report Regarding his Ability to File Opposition or Statement of Non-Opposition to Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment signed by Magistrate Judge Sheila K. Oberto on 02/06/2012. Status Report due by 2/27/2012. (Flores, E)
|
|
Filing
38
ORDER Directing Personal Service of Subpoenas Duces Tecum by United States Marshals Service without Prepayment of Costs, signed by Magistrate Judge Sheila K. Oberto on 11/28/11. (Verduzco, M)
|
|
Filing
37
ORDER DENYING Plaintiff's Motion to Compel Defendants to Produce Documents and Authorizing Issuance of Subpoenas Duces Tecum 35 ; ORDER Notifying Parties That Subpoenas Duces Tecum Will Issue After Fifteen Days From The Date of Service of This Order, signed by Magistrate Judge Sheila K. Oberto on 10/17/11. (Hellings, J)
|
|
Filing
28
ORDER Striking Objection 27 , signed by Magistrate Judge Sheila K. Oberto on 5/2/11. (Verduzco, M)
|
|
Filing
25
ORDER GRANTING Plaintiff's Motion to Compel IN PART, Requiring Defendants to Serve Supplemental Responses, and GRANTING Plaintiff Leave to File an Additional Motion to Compel if Necessary, signed by Magistrate Judge Sheila K. Oberto on 3/24/11: Within thirty (30) days of service of this order, Defendants shall serve supplemental responses to Plaintiff's requests for the production of documents, numbers 1 through 4. (Hellings, J)
|
|
Filing
18
ORDER Extending Application of Discovery and Scheduling Order to Defendant Sullivan, signed by Magistrate Judge Sandra M. Snyder on 5/26/2010. (Verduzco, M)
|
|
Filing
11
ORDER DENYING 10 Motion for Order Recognizing Cognizability of First and Eighth Amendment Claims or for Leave to File a Partial Amendment signed by Magistrate Judge Sandra M. Snyder on 2/5/2010. (Figueroa, O)
|
|
Filing
9
ORDER DIRECTING PLAINTIFF TO SUBMIT SERVICE DOCUMENTS and USM-285 Forms. Service is appropriate for W. J. Sullivan, F. Gonzalez, D. Meadows, J. Jones, J. Peterson. Clerk to send plaintiff: 5 Summons, 5 USM-285 Forms, and 6 copies of the Complaint filed on 05/26/2009, signed by Magistrate Judge Sandra M. Snyder on 1/29/2010. (Case Management Deadline: 3/3/2010) (Martin, S)
|
|
Filing
8
ORDER DISMISSING Certain Claims and Defendants from Action 1 , and Authorizing Service of Plaintiff's Complaint on Equal Protections CLaim signed by Magistrate Judge Sandra M. Snyder on 12/14/2009. (Figueroa, O)
|
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 Eastern 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.
