(PC) Perez v. Diaz et al
| Raul Perez |
| Anthony Carter, Kenneth J. Pogue, Landry, Ralph Diaz, Nunez, Jeffrey Macomber, Chelsea Armenta, P. Kuntz, Montgomery, Vance, Wright, Rossolio, B. Wilson, Strippling, Frias, Messerli, Allen, Sanders, P. Birdsong and Steven Escobar |
| 2:2020cv02142 |
| October 26, 2020 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of California |
| Kimberly J Mueller |
| Kendall J Newman |
| Prisoner: Civil Rights |
| 42 U.S.C. § 1983 |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on December 9, 2020. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| OTHER COURT CASE NUMBER from Central District of California case number 5:20-cv-02509. (Gonzalez, R) |
Filing 10
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 12/03/20, CASE TRANSFERRED to the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California.(Plummer, M)
|
| SERVICE BY MAIL: #10 Order, Case Transferred Out to Another District served on Raul Perez. (Plummer, M) |
| Filing 9 PRISONER TRUST FUND ACCOUNT STATEMENT by Raul Perez. (Zignago, K.) |
| Filing 8 CLERKS NOTICE: The Clerk of Court is in receipt of a Motion to Proceed in Forma Pauperis. The California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation is DIRECTED to submit a Certified Prison Trust account statement for Raul Perez, CDC AE-7619 to the Clerks Office within 72 business hours of this notification. The Prison Trust Account statement must reflect the activity for the last six months. Please email the certified prison trust account statement in pdf format to FilingsSacramento@caed.uscourts.gov with the case number in the subject line as reflected on this notification. (Plummer, M) |
| Filing 7 CLERK'S NOTICE REASSIGNING CASE (TEXT ONLY). This case has been assigned to Chief District Judge Kimberly J. Mueller and Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman. The new case number is: 2:20-cv-02142-KJM-KJN P. (Mena-Sanchez, L) |
| SERVICE BY MAIL: 7 Clerk's Notice Reassigning Case served on Raul Perez. (Mena-Sanchez, L) |
| Filing 6 CONSENT/DECLINE of U.S. Magistrate Judge Jurisdiction. Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 73(b)(1), this document is restricted to attorneys and court staff only. Judges do not have access to view this document and will be informed of a party's response only if all parties have consented to the referral. (Mena-Sanchez, L) |
| Filing 5 MOTION to PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS by Raul Perez. (Mena-Sanchez, L) |
|
Filing 4
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 10/29/20 ORDERING plaintiff shall submit, within 30 days from the date of this order, a signed affidavit in support of his request to proceed in forma pauperis on the form provided by the Clerk of Court, or the required fees in the amount of $400.00. The Clerk of the Court is directed to send plaintiff a new Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis By a Prisoner. (Plummer, M)
|
| SERVICE BY MAIL: #4 Order on Motion to Proceed in forma pauperis, and prisoner IFP form served on Raul Perez. (Plummer, M) |
| Filing 3 PRISONER NEW CASE DOCUMENTS and ORDER RE CONSENT ISSUED; Consent or Decline due by 11/30/2020 (Attachments: #1 Litigant Letter) (Kaminski, H) |
| SERVICE BY MAIL: #3 Prisoner New Case Documents for Magistrate Judge as Presider,served on Raul Perez. (Kaminski, H) |
| Filing 2 MOTION to PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS by Raul Perez. (Kaminski, H) |
| Filing 1 PRISONER CIVIL RIGHTS COMPLAINT against All Defendants by Raul Perez.(Kaminski, H) |
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.
