Anderson v. Lambert, et al
| Robert - Anderson |
| - Lambert, Crooms and Holis |
| 2:2009cv00194 |
| January 23, 2009 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of California |
| Prisoner: Civil Rights Office |
| Sacramento |
| John F. Moulds |
| None |
| Federal Question |
| 42:1983 Prisoner Civil Rights |
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
26
FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge John F. Moulds on 01/12/10 recommending that this action be dismissed pursuant to FRCP 41(b). Referred to Judge Garland E. Burrell. Objections due within 14 days.(Plummer, M)
|
|
Filing
24
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge John F. Moulds on 11/6/09 ORDERING that within 30 days of the date of this order, plaintiff shall file an opposition, if any he has, to the motion to dismiss or a statement of non-opposition.(Dillon, M)
|
|
Filing
15
ORDER DIRECTING USM to serve * Amended Complaint * filed on * 5/4/09,* on * Lambert, Crooms, Holis*, signed by Magistrate Judge John F. Moulds on 7/2/09. Within 10 days from the date of this order, the United States Marshal isdirected to notify defendants Lambert, Hollis and Croome of the commencement of this action and to request a waiver of service of summons. The Clerk of the Court shall serve upon plaintiff a copy of the Local Rules of Court. (cc USM)(Dillon, M)
|
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.
