Jones v. California State Superior Courts, et al.
Deno A. Jones |
California State Superior Courts, Department of Corrections, Parole Hearing Board and California Attorney General |
1:2017cv00232 |
February 17, 2017 |
US District Court for the Eastern District of California |
Fresno Office |
Kings |
Dale A. Drozd |
Barbara A. McAuliffe |
Civil Rights |
42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 |
None |
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
Document Text |
---|
Filing 21 FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS recommending that 17 Plaintiff's Motion for Preliminary Injunction or Temporary Restraining Order be DENIED and that the Action be DISMISSED For Failure to State a Claim re 15 First Amended Prisoner Civil Rights Complaint signed by Magistrate Judge Barbara A. McAuliffe on 5/18/2018. Referred to Judge O'Neill. Objections to F&R due within fourteen (14) days. (Jessen, A) |
Filing 19 ORDER Adopting 13 Findings and Recommendations Regarding Plaintiff's 8 Motion for Preliminary Injunction and 10 Restraining Order, signed by District Judge Dale A. Drozd on 12/20/17. (Gonzalez, R) |
Filing 18 ORDER denying 16 Request for Court to take Judicial Notice of Administrative Remedy not available signed by Magistrate Judge Barbara A. McAuliffe on 11/6/2017. (Lundstrom, T) |
Filing 13 FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS Regarding Plaintiff's Motions for Preliminary Injunction and Restraining Order 8 , 10 , signed by Magistrate Judge Barbara A. McAuliffe on 10/5/17: 14-Day Deadline. (Hellings, J) |
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.