Lopez v. Shiesha et al
| Clay Edward Lopez |
| M. Stainer, Lagham, S. Shiesha, M. Ross, Baker and M. Thompson |
| 1:2012cv00076 |
| January 17, 2012 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of California |
| Fresno Office |
| Kern |
| Michael J. Seng |
| Civil Rights |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 |
| 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
27
ORDER Granting Plaintiff's Request For Status (ECF No. 26 ), signed by Magistrate Judge Michael J. Seng on 2/24/2014. (Fahrney, E)
|
|
Filing
24
ORDER DISMISSING Plaintiff's Complaint for Failure to Comply With a Court Order 23 , signed by Magistrate Judge Michael J. Seng on 10/21/13: Clerk Shall Close the Case. (CASE CLOSED)(Hellings, J)
|
|
Filing
23
ORDER to SHOW CAUSE why Case should not be Dismissed without Prejudice for Failure to Comply with Court Order signed by Magistrate Judge Michael J. Seng on 09/17/2013. Show Cause Response due by 10/7/2013. (Flores, E)
|
|
Filing
21
ORDER to SHOW CAUSE Why Certain Claims and Defendants Should not be Dismissed for Failure to Comply with Court Order, signed by Magistrate Judge Michael J. Seng on 3/4/13. 14-Day Deadline. (Verduzco, M)
|
|
Filing
18
ORDER Denying Plaintiff's 16 Motion to Supplement the First Amended Complaint and Denying, without Prejudice, Injunctive Relief signed by Magistrate Judge Michael J. Seng on 12/21/2012. (Flores, E)
|
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.
