Fletcher v. Quin et al
Gregory L. Fletcher |
Quin, Lopez, Stricland, Romero, Galvan, Grisson, Sorranno and Sanchez |
3:2015cv02156 |
September 24, 2015 |
US District Court for the Southern District of California |
San Diego Office |
San Diego |
Gonzalo P. Curiel |
Nita L. Stormes |
Prisoner: Civil Rights |
42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 pr Prisoner Civil Rights |
None |
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
Document Text |
---|
Filing 51 ORDER Granting 47 Motion and Appointing Pro Bono Counsel. The Court appoints Grace Jun, Esq., as Pro Bono Counsel for Plaintiff. The Clerk of the Court to serve Ms. Jun with a copy of this Order at the address listed above upon filing. Signed by Judge Gonzalo P. Curiel on 11/8/18. (All non-registered users served via U.S. Mail Service & Order sent via US mail to Ms. Jun)(dlg) |
Filing 42 ORDER Denying 41 Motion for Appointment of Counsel. Signed by Magistrate Judge Nita L. Stormes on 2/13/18. (All non-registered users served via U.S. Mail Service)(dlg) |
Filing 37 ORDER Granting 35 Motion to Dismiss With Leave to Amend Within Sixty Days. The Court grants Defendants' motion to dismiss the claims against Defendant Soriano. Signed by Judge Gonzalo P. Curiel on 10/10/17. (All non-registered users served via U.S. Mail Service)(dlg) |
Filing 29 ORDER Dismissing With Prejudice Defendants Quinn and Galvin. More than sixty days have elapsed since the Court's March 3, 2017 Order. If plaintiff does not take advantage of the opportunity to fix his complaint, a district court may convert the dismissal of the complaint into dismissal of the entire action. Signed by Judge Gonzalo P. Curiel on 7/11/17.(All non-registered users served via U.S. Mail Service)(dlg) |
Filing 26 ORDER Adopting 25 Report and Recommendation: Granting 22 Defendants' Motion to Dismiss; and Extending the Time to Effect Service. Plaintiff must file any amended complaint, with additional allegations as to Defendants Galvan and Quinn, within sixty days from the date of this order. The Court grants Plaintiff an additional ninety (90) days to serve the First Amended Complaint on the Defendants who never received service and Order the Deputy Attorney General contact the litigation coordinator at RJD to attempt to identify the remaining, unserved defendants. Signed by Judge Gonzalo P. Curiel on 3/3/17. (All non-registered users served via U.S. Mail Service)(dlg) |
Filing 11 ORDER Granting 8 Plaintiff's Motion for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis; and Directing U.S. Marshal to Effect Service of Summons and Complaint. (Order electronically transmitted to Secretary of CDCR). The Clerk of the Court is directe d to serve a copy of this Order on Scott Kernan, Secretary, California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation. The Clerk is directed to issue a summons as to Plaintiff's First Amended Complaint. Signed by Judge Gonzalo P. Curiel on 2/2/16. (All non-registered users served via U.S. Mail Service) (Certified Copy to USM) (IFP packet prepared and mailed to plaintiff. dlg) |
Filing 4 ORDER DISMISSING Civil Action Without Prejudice For Failing to Pay Filing Fee Required by 28 U.S.C. § 1914(a) and/or Failing to Move to Proceed In Forma Pauperis Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a). Plaintiff is granted forty-five (45) days le ave to file a Motion to Proceed IFP or pay filing fee. Signed by Judge Gonzalo P. Curiel on 10/26/2015. (All non-registered users served via U.S. Mail Service)(Petitioner sent blank Motion and Declaration in Support of Motion to Proceed In Forma Pauperis, and approved civil rights complaint form)(srm) |
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.