Johnson v. Paramo
| John A. Johnson |
| Daniel Paramo |
| 3:2015cv01531 |
| July 9, 2015 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of California |
| San Diego Office |
| San Diego |
| Jan M. Adler |
| Gonzalo P. Curiel |
| Prisoner: Civil Rights |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 pr Prisoner Civil Rights |
| None |
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
12
ORDER DISMISSING Amended Complaint for Failing to State a Claim. The Court dismisses Plaintiff's Amended Complaint (ECF No. 11 ) without further leave to amend for failing to state a claim upon which relief can be granted; and certifies that an IFP appeal from this Order of dismissal would not be taken "in good faith". Signed by Judge Gonzalo P. Curiel on 5/11/16.(All non-registered users served via U.S. Mail Service)(dlg)
|
|
Filing
10
ORDER Granting 9 Plaintiff's Motion for Extension of Time to Amend. Plaintiff's Amended Complaint, should he elect to file one, must be received by the Court no later than Monday, January 25, 2016. The Clerk of Court is directed to p rovide Plaintiff with another blankcopy of the Court's form "Complaint under the Civil Rights Act, 42 U.S.C. § 1983." If Plaintiff does not to file an Amended Complaint by January 25, 2016, thiscivil action shall remain dismissed. Signed by Judge Gonzalo P. Curiel on 12/15/15. (All non-registered users served via U.S. Mail Service) Amended Complaint form mailed(dlg)
|
|
Filing
7
ORDER Granting 2 Plaintiff's Motion to Proceed In Forma Pauperis; Sua Sponte Dismissing Complaint for Failing to State a Claim; and Granting 4 Plaintiff's Motion for Leave to Amend: The Court directs the Secretary of the CDCR, or h is designee, to collect from Plaintiff's prison trust account the $350 filing fee owed in this case by garnishing monthly payments from his account in an amount equal to twenty percent (20%) of the preceding month's income and forwarding those payments to the Clerk of the Court; Directs the Clerk of the Court to serve a copy of this Order on Jeffrey A. Beard, Secretary; Dismisses Plaintiff's Complaint for failing to state a claim upon which relief may be granted; Grants Plaintiff's Motion to Amend. Plaintiff may re-open this case by filing an Amended Complaint which addresses the deficiencies of pleading identified in this Order within forty-five (45) days; Directs the Clerk of Court to provide Plain tiff with a blank copy of the Court's form "Complaint under the Civil Rights Act, 42 U.S.C. § 1983". Signed by Judge Gonzalo P. Curiel on 11/5/15. (All non-registered users served via U.S. Mail Service)Blank 1983 form mailed to Plaintiff. (dlg)
|
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
| Search for this case: Johnson v. Paramo | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Plaintiff: John A. Johnson | |
| 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 ] |
| Defendant: Daniel Paramo | |
| 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.
