Daniel v. Delta Hawkeye Sercurity Service
| Melvin DeVan Daniel |
| Delta Hawkeye Sercurity Service and San Joaquin County |
| 2:2013cv01752 |
| August 26, 2013 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of California |
| Sacramento Office |
| San Joaquin |
| Edmund F. Brennan |
| Morrison C. England |
| 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
10
FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Edmund F. Brennan on 11/7/14 Recommending that this action be dismissed, and that the Clerk be directed to close this case re 1 Complaint filed by Melvin DeVan Daniel. These Findings and Recommendations are submitted to U.S. District Judge Morrison C. England, Jr. Objections to these F&R due within fourteen days. (Mena-Sanchez, L)
|
|
Filing
7
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Edmund F. Brennan on 7/2/14 GRANTING 2 Motion to Proceed IFP. Plaintiff's complaint is DISMISSED with leave to amend, as provided herein, and plaintiff is GRANTED 30 days from the date of service of this orde r to file an amended complaint. The amended complaint must bear the docket number assigned to this case and must be labeled "First Amended Complaint." Failure to timely file an amended complaint in accordance with this order will result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed. (Meuleman, A)
|
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.
