Blackshire v. Sacramento County
Patrick Blackshire |
Sacramento County |
2:2015cv01126 |
May 26, 2015 |
US District Court for the Eastern District of California |
Sacramento Office |
Sacramento |
Carolyn K. Delaney |
Kimberly J. Mueller |
Civil Rights |
42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 |
Plaintiff |
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
Document Text |
---|
Filing 10 ORDER AND FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Carolyn K. Delaney on 9/29/15 ORDERING that request for extension of time (ECF No. 9) is denied as moot and the findings and recommendations (ECF No. 8) are vacated. RECOMMENDING that this action be dismissed without prejudice. F&R referred to Judge Kimberly J. Mueller. Objections to F&R due within fourteen days. (Kaminski, H) |
Filing 8 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Carolyn K. Delaney on 9/24/2015 RECOMMENDING that this action be dismissed without prejudice pursuant to Local Rule 110, F.R.Cv.P. Rule 41(b); REFERRING this matter to Judge Kimberly J. Mueller; ORDERING that any objections be filed within fourteen days. (Michel, G.) |
Filing 7 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Carolyn K. Delaney on 8/19/15 ORDERING that Plaintiff's 6 Second Amended Complaint is DISMISSED; and Plaintiff is GRANTED 30 days from the date of service of this order to file a third amended complaint that co mplies with the requirements of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, and the Local Rules of Practice; the third amended complaint must bear the docket number assigned to this case and must be labeled "Third Amended Complaint;" plaintiff must file an original and 2 copies of the third amended complaint; failure to file a third amended complaint in accordance with this order will result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed. (Meuleman, A) |
Filing 5 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Carolyn K. Delaney on 7/8/15 ORDERING that Plaintiff's amended complaint is dismissed; and Plaintiff is granted thirty days from the date of service of this order to file a second amended complaint that comp lies with the requirements of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, and the Local Rules of Practice; the second amended complaint must bear the docket number assigned this case and must be labeled "Second Amended Complaint"; plaintiff must file an original and two copies of the second amended complaint; failure to file a second amended complaint in accordance with this order will result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed. (Becknal, R) |
Filing 3 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Carolyn K. Delaney on 5/29/15 GRANTING 2 Motion to Proceed IFP. Complaint is DISMISSED with leave to amend within 30 days. (Manzer, C) |
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: Blackshire v. Sacramento County | |
---|---|
Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
Plaintiff: Patrick Blackshire | |
Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
Search Finance | [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ] |
Search Web | [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
Defendant: Sacramento County | |
Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
Search Finance | [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ] |
Search Web | [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | 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.