(PS) Huang v. Jones
Han Jing Huang |
Janet Mary Jones |
2:2019cv00343 |
February 26, 2019 |
US District Court for the Eastern District of California |
Deborah Barnes |
Morrison C England |
Civil Rights: Jobs |
42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 |
None |
Docket Report
This docket was last retrieved on February 6, 2020. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
Document Text |
---|
Filing 7 REQUEST for PROTECTION re mind attacks crime by Han Jing Huang. (Mena-Sanchez, L) |
Filing 6 MINUTE ORDER (Text Only) issued by courtroom deputy for District Judge, Morrison C. England, Jr.: The Court has reviewed Plaintiff's Amended Motion for a Temporary Restraining Order (ECF No. 4). Plaintiff's request still suffers from several defects that render it insufficient under Local Rule 231. These previously identified deficiencies include, in part, a failure to brief all relevant legal issues (L.R. 231(c)(3)), the lack of an affidavit supporting the existence of an irreparable injury (L.R. 231(c)(4)), and the absence of an affidavit detailing notice, or efforts to effect notice, to the affected parties (L.R. 231(c)(5)). Because of these defects, Plaintiff's Amended Motion (ECF No. 4) is DENIED without prejudice for failure to comply with Eastern District of California Local Rule 231. (Deutsch, S) |
Filing 5 MINUTE ORDER (Text Only) issued by courtroom deputy for District Judge, Morrison C. England, Jr.: The Court has reviewed Plaintiff's Motion for a Temporary Restraining Order (ECF No. 3). Plaintiff's request suffers from several defects that render it insufficient under Local Rule 231. These deficiencies include, in part, a failure to brief all relevant legal issues (L.R. 231(c)(3)), the lack of an affidavit supporting the existence of an irreparable injury (L.R. 231(c)(4)), and the absence of an affidavit detailing notice, or efforts to effect notice, to the affected parties (L.R. 231(c)(5)). Because of these defects, Plaintiff's Motion (ECF No. 3) is DENIED without prejudice for failure to comply with Eastern District of California Local Rule 231. (Deutsch, S) |
Filing 4 AMENDED #3 MOTION for TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER by Han Jing Huang. (Benson, A.) |
SERVICE BY MAIL: 6 Minute Order served on Han Jing Huang. (Deutsch, S) |
SERVICE BY MAIL: 5 Minute Order served on Han Jing Huang. (Deutsch, S) |
APPLICATION TO PROCEED IFP filed - Action Required. (Kastilahn, A) |
Filing 3 MOTION for TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER by Han Jing Huang. (Attachments: #1 TRO Checklist)(Kastilahn, A) |
Filing 2 MOTION to PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS by Han Jing Huang. (Kastilahn, A) |
Filing 1 COMPLAINT against Janet Mary Jones by Han Jing Huang. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet)(Kastilahn, A) |
Access additional case information on PACER
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: (PS) Huang v. Jones | |
---|---|
Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
Defendant: Janet Mary Jones | |
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 ] |
Plaintiff: Han Jing Huang | |
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.