(PS) Parker v. Sacramento Police Department et al
| Akika Parker |
| Sacramento Sheriff and Sacramento Police Department |
| 2:2020cv00171 |
| January 23, 2020 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of California |
| Carolyn K Delaney |
| Troy L Nunley |
| Civil Rights: Other |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on August 4, 2020. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 3
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Carolyn K. Delaney on 3/12/2020 GRANTING #2 Motion to Proceed IFP. Plaintiff's complaint is DISMISSED; and Within 28 days of this order, Plaintiff shall file either (a) a first amended complaint in accordance with this order, or (b) a notice of voluntary dismissal of the action without prejudice; and Failure to file either a first amended complaint or a notice of voluntary dismissal by the required deadline may result in the imposition of sanctions, including dismissal of the action with prejudice pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b). (Mena-Sanchez, L)
|
| SERVICE BY MAIL: #3 Order, served on Akika Parker. (Mena-Sanchez, L) |
| Filing 2 MOTION to PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS by Akika Parker. (York, M) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT against All Defendants by Akika Parker. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet). (York, M) |
| APPLICATION TO PROCEED IFP filed - Action Required. (York, M) |
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
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.
