Reed v. James, et al.
| Stephen C. Reed |
| C. James, T. Gonzales, III, F. Munoz and J. Kavanaugh |
| 1:2010cv00073 |
| January 14, 2010 |
| U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California |
| Fresno Office |
| Kings |
| Lawrence J. O'Neill |
| Gary S. Austin |
| Prisoner: Civil Rights |
| 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
20
FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS Recommending That This Action be Dismissed, With Prejudice, for Failure to State a Claim Under Section 1983, and That This Dismissal be Subject to 28 U.S.C. 1915(g), signed by Magistrate Judge Gary S. Austin on 5/30/2012, referred to Judge O'Neill. Objections to F&R Due Within Thirty Days. (Marrujo, C)
|
|
Filing
17
ORDER Denying 16 Motion to Add Exhibits to Amended Complaint, signed by Magistrate Judge Gary S. Austin on 12/8/11. (Verduzco, M)
|
|
Filing
14
ORDER DISCHARGING 9 Order to Show Cause and ORDER GRANTING 12 Motion For Leave to File an Amended Complaint, signed by Magistrate Judge Gary S. Austin on 11/9/2011. The Clerk's Office is directed to file the First Amended Complaint Lodged with the Court on November 7, 2011. (Jessen, A)
|
|
Filing
9
ORDER to SHOW CAUSE why action should not be dismissed signed by Magistrate Judge Gary S. Austin on 3/23/2011. Show Cause Response due by 4/25/2011. (Lundstrom, T)
|
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the U.S. 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.
