Colbert v. Leininger, et al.
| George K. Colbert |
| D. Leininger, Tim V. Virga and Matthew Cate |
| 2:2013cv00382 |
| February 26, 2013 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of California |
| Sacramento Office |
| Sacramento |
| Kimberly J. Mueller |
| Kendall J. Newman |
| 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
92
ORDER adopting in full 88 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS, signed by District Judge Kimberly J. Mueller on 3/20/18. Plaintiff's 82 motion is DENIED. (Kastilahn, A)
|
|
Filing
90
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 10/31/2017 GRANTING 89 Motion for Extension of Time. Plaintiff granted up to and including 11/21/2017 to file objections to the findings and recommendations. (Henshaw, R)
|
|
Filing
88
FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 10/11/2017 RECOMMENDING plaintiff's 82 motion be denied. Referred to Judge Kimberly J. Mueller; Objections to F&R due within 14 days.(Yin, K)
|
|
Filing
78
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 08/22/16 ordering ( Settlement Conference set for 9/16/2016 at 10:00 AM at California State Prison Corcoran, before Magistrate Judge Michael J. Seng via telephonic conference.) The clerk of the court shall serve a copy of this order on the Litigation Coordinator at California State Prison Corcoran, via fax at 559-992-7372. (cc: MJS) (Plummer, M)
|
|
Filing
72
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 06/06/16 ordering. This case is set for a settlement conference before Magistrate Judge Michael J. Seng on June 24, 2016, at California State Prison, Corcoran, 4001 King Avenue, Corcoran, Califor nia 93212. The start time for the settlement conference will be determined at a later date and will be set by separate order. Each party shall provide a confidential settlement statement to the following email address: mjsorders@caed.uscourts.go v. Plaintiff shall mail his confidential settlement statement to Sujean Park, ADR & Pro Bono Program Director, USDC CAED, 501 I Street, Suite 4-200, Sacramento, California 95814. The envelope shall be marked Confidential Settlement Statement. Settlem ent statements shall arrive no later than June 17, 2016. Parties shall also file a Notice of Submission of Confidential Settlement Conference Statement (See Local Rule 270(d)). The Clerk of the Court is directed to serve a copy of this order on the Litigation Coordinator at California State Prison, Corcoran, via facsimile at (559) 992-7372. (cc: MJS)(Plummer, M) Modified on 6/6/2016 (Plummer, M).
|
|
Filing
71
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 1/4/16 ORDERING that defendant Leiningers motion for modification of the discovery and scheduling order (ECF No. 63 ) is granted nunc pro tunc, and defendants November 20, 2015 motion for summary judgment (ECF No. 65 ) is deemed timely filed. Defendants motion for an extension of time (ECF No. 68 ) is granted nunc pro tunc, and defendants December 17, 2015 reply (ECF No. 69 ) is deemed timely filed. (Dillon, M)
|
|
Filing
61
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 10/19/2015 DENYING without prejudice plaintiff's 60 motion for appointment of counsel. (Yin, K)
|
|
Filing
59
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 10/01/15 ordering no later than 30 days from the filing of this order, plaintiff shall file with this court a response that identifies or describes: the specific legal materials that plaintiff al leges were wrongfully confiscated and not returned to his position. Those circumstances of the alleged confiscation that are known to the plaintiff, including the date on which the alleged confiscation occurred, the identities of the persons plainti ff believes are responsible for the alleged confiscation, and plaintiff's whereabouts during the alleged confiscation. The relevance of allegedly confiscated materials to plaintiff's case. Prison officials response to plaint's grievances to the alleged confiscation. (Plummer, M)
|
|
Filing
53
ORDER signed by Judge Kimberly J. Mueller on 3/30/15 ORDERING that the FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS filed 2/13/15 49 are ADOPTED in full; Defendant's MOTION for Summary Judgment 30 is GRANTED; and This matter is referred back to the assigned Magistrate Judge for further pretrial proceedings. (Mena-Sanchez, L)
|
|
Filing
51
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 3/13/2015 GRANTING 50 Motion for Extension of time. Plaintiff is DIRECTED to file objections, if any, to the 49 Findings and Recommendations no later than 3/25/2015. Defendants' reply, if any, shall be filed within 7 days thereafter. (Donati, J)
|
|
Filing
49
FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 2/13/2015 RECOMMENDING that defendant's 30 motion for summary judgment be granted. Referred to Judge Kimberly J. Mueller; Objections due within 14 days. (Yin, K)
|
|
Filing
35
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 08/22/14 ordering that within 30 days from the date of this order, plaintiff shall file an opposition, if any, to the motion for summary judgment. (Plummer, M)
|
|
Filing
26
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 04/16/14 denying 23 Motion to Dismiss. Defendant may file and serve, within 30 days after the filing date of this order, a motion for summary judgment that includes notice to plaintiff of the evidentiary requirements for opposing the motion. (Plummer, M)
|
|
Filing
15
ORDER signed by Judge Kimberly J. Mueller on 9/10/2013 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 9 as to plaintiff's motion for preliminary injunction are ADOPTED in FULL; and plaintiff's 8 motion for preliminary injunctive relief is DENIED. (Reader, L)
|
|
Filing
9
ORDER and FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 07/08/13 granting 7 Motion to Proceed IFP. Plaintiff is obligated to pay the statutory filing fee of $350.00 for this action. All fees shall be collected in accordance with the court's CDC order filed concurrently herewith. The allegations in the complaint are sufficient to state potentially cognizable claims against defendant Leninger, but not defendants Virga or Cate. Therefore, the claims a gainst defendants Virga and Cate are dismissed without prejudice. Within 30 days after service of this order plaintiff shall file the attached Notice of Submission of Documents on which plaintiff shall indicate his choice to proceed in one of the fo llowing ways. Plaintiff may file an amended complaint, in an attempt to restate his claims against defendant Leninger, as well as to state additionally cognizable claims against defendant Leninger and/or defendants, OR plaintiff may proceed on the i nstant complaint by completing and returning the enclosed materials necessary to serve process on defendant Leninger. The clerk of the court shall provide plaintiff with this order, a blank summons, a copy of the complaint 1 , 1 USM-285 form and in struction sheet to be completed and retuned within 30 days. Also, RECOMMENDING that plaintiff's motion for preliminary injunctive relief 8 be denied. MOTION for preliminary injunctive relief 8 referred to Judge Kimberly J. Mueller. Objections due within 14 days.(Plummer, M)
|
|
Filing
3
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 3/6/2013 ORDERING plaintiff to submit, within 30 days, an affidavit in support of his request to proceed ifp, or the appropriate filing fee; and the Clerk shall send plaintiff a new ifp application.(Yin, K)
|
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.
