Woodson v. Ramirez et al
| Thomas R. Woodson |
| M. Ramirez, M. Barra, J. O. Sigler, P. Kuzil-Ruan, Cebraros, L. S. McEwen and J. Builtman |
| 3:2012cv01825 |
| July 23, 2012 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of California |
| San Diego Office |
| Imperial |
| Michael M. Anello |
| Bernard G. Skomal |
| Civil Rights |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 |
| Plaintiff |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
25
ORDER Granting 13 Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim. For the reasons stated herein, the Court concludes that Plaintiff did not exhaust his administrative remedies. Accordingly, the Court Grants Defendants' Motion and Dismisses this action without prejudice. The Clerk of Court is instructed to enter judgment accordingly and close the case. Signed by Judge Michael M. Anello on 3/28/2013. (All non-registered users served via U.S. Mail Service) (leh)
|
|
Filing
3
ORDER Denying 2 Motion for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis; and Dismissing Case Without Prejudice Pursuant to 28 USC 1915(a). It is ordered that Plaintiff is granted 45 days from the date this Order is filed to either pay the entire $350 filing fee; or file a new motion to proceed IFP. Signed by Judge Michael M. Anello on 7/26/2012. (Motion for IFP Form Mailed to Plaintiff) (All non-registered users served via U.S. Mail Service)(leh)
|
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 Southern 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.
