(PC) Edwards v. Kuersten
Plaintiff: David E. Edwards
Defendant: M. Kuersten
Case Number: 2:2021cv00259
Filed: February 10, 2021
Court: US District Court for the Eastern District of California
Presiding Judge: Edmund F Brennan
Referring Judge: John A Mendez
Nature of Suit: Prisoner: Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983
Jury Demanded By: None
Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on October 18, 2023. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
April 7, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 7 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Edmund F. Brennan on 4/7/2021 DISMISSING #1 Complaint with leave to amend within 30 days from the date of service of this order. (Henshaw, R)
April 7, 2021 Opinion or Order SERVICE BY MAIL: #7 Order served on David E. Edwards. (Henshaw, R)
March 22, 2021 Opinion or Order RECEIPT number #CAE200112866 $402.00 fbo David E. Edwards by Kathryn L Thaut on 3/22/2021. (Mena-Sanchez, L)
March 9, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 6 ORDER and FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Edmund F. Brennan on 3/9/2021 ORDERING Clerk to randomly assign a U.S. District Judge to this action and RECOMMENDING #2 Motion to Proceed In Forma Pauperis be denied and Plaintiff be ordered to pay the $402 filing fee within 14 days from the date of any order adopting these findings and recommendations and be warned that failure to do so will result in the dismissal of this action. Assigned and referred to Judge John A. Mendez. Objections due within 14 days after being served with these findings and recommendations. (Henshaw, R)
March 9, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 5 CLERK'S NOTICE REASSIGNING CASE (TEXT ONLY). This case has been assigned to District Judge John A. Mendez and Magistrate Judge Edmund F. Brennan. The new case number is: 2:21-cv-0259-JAM-EFB (PC). (Henshaw, R)
March 9, 2021 Opinion or Order SERVICE BY MAIL: #6 Order and Findings and Recommendations served on David E. Edwards. (Henshaw, R)
February 22, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 4 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. (Kastilahn, A)
February 11, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 3 PRISONER NEW CASE DOCUMENTS and ORDER RE CONSENT ISSUED; Consent or Decline due by 3/18/2021 (Attachments: #1 Litigant Letter) (Rodriguez, E)
February 11, 2021 Opinion or Order SERVICE BY MAIL: #3 Prisoner New Case Documents for Magistrate Judge as Presider served on David E. Edwards. (Rodriguez, E)
February 10, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 2 MOTION to PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS by David E. Edwards. (Rodriguez, E)
February 10, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 1 PRISONER CIVIL RIGHTS COMPLAINT against M. Kuersten by David E. Edwards.(Rodriguez, E)

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 this case: (PC) Edwards v. Kuersten
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: M. Kuersten
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: David E. Edwards
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.


Why Is My Information Online?