Rouser v. Tilton et al
2:2006cv01527 |
July 11, 2006 |
US District Court for the Eastern District of California |
Sacramento Office |
Gregory G. Hollows |
Lawrence K. Karlton |
Prisoner: Civil Rights |
42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights |
None |
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
Document Text |
---|
Filing 92 FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Gregory G. Hollows on 7/22/10 RECOMMENDING the plaintiff's 4/30/09, motion for summary judgment 66 be denied; and Defendants' 12/11/09, motion for summary judgment 83 , begranted and this case closed. Referred to Judge Lawrence K. Karlton; Objections due within 14 days after being served with these findings and recommendations. (Becknal, R) |
Filing 86 ORDER signed by Senior Judge Lawrence K. Karlton on 12/23/09 ORDERING that, upon reconsideration, the 76 order of the magistrate judge is AFFIRMED. (Engbretson, K.) |
Filing 85 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Gregory G. Hollows on 12/22/09 granting 84 Motion to reinstate motion for summary judgment. (Plummer, M) |
Filing 78 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Gregory G. Hollows on 11/24/09 ordering plaintiff shall file with the court his request to reinstate his previously submitted summary judgment motion on 12/11/09. Defendants shall file and serve their motion for summ ary judgment on 12/11/09. Defendant's opposition to plaintiff's reinstated motion for summary judgment shall be filed and served on 01/04/10. Plaintiff's opposition to defendants' motion for summary judgment shall be filed and served on 01/04/10. (Plummer, M) |
Filing 76 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Gregory G. Hollows on 11/17/09 denying 73 Motion for law library access. (Plummer, M) |
Filing 75 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Gregory G. Hollows on 11/13/09 ORDERING that either party may file a dispositive motion within 28 days of the date of this order.(Dillon, M) |
Filing 71 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Gregory G. Hollows on 8/7/09 ORDERING that pltf's 70 motion for access to his legal property is DENIED w/out prejudice. (Yin, K) |
Filing 65 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Gregory G. Hollows on 4/2/09 ORDERING that defendants motion to modify the scheduling order 64 is GRANTED; The discovery cut-off date of 4/3/09, is VACATED and re-set to 6/2/09; the dispositive motion deadline of 9/4/09, is VACATED and re-set to 11/3/09.(Dillon, M) |
Filing 62 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Gregory G. Hollows on 1/28/09 DENYING 61 Request construed as motion to compel. (Dillon, M) |
Filing 2 ORDER and FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Judge Gregory G. Hollows on 7/11/06 ORDERING that 232 Motion to Dismiss is VACATED. James E. Tilton is substituted as defendant in his official capacity. Within 30 days of the date of this order, James E. Tilton shall file a response to plaintiff's claims for injunctive relief contained in the 1/30/06 supplemental complaint. The Clerk is directed to copy plaintiff's 1/30/06 supplemental complaint and open it as a new action assigned to t he same judges as are assigned to the instant action. It is Hereby RECOMMENDED that 233 Motion to Stay be denied. Objections due within 20 days after being served with these findings and recommendations. Motion referred to Judge Lawrence K. Karlton. (2:93cv0767 LKK GGH) (Donati, 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
Search for this case: Rouser v. Tilton et al | |
---|---|
Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
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.