McGinnis v. Ramos
Plaintiff: Anthony McGinnis
Defendant: A.T. Ramos
Case Number: 3:2015cv02812
Filed: December 14, 2015
Court: US District Court for the Southern District of California
Office: San Diego Office
County: San Diego
Presiding Judge: Jill L. Burkhardt
Presiding Judge: Janis L. Sammartino
Nature of Suit: Prisoner: Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 42:1983pr Prisoner Civil Rights
Jury Demanded By: Plaintiff

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed Document Text
July 31, 2019 Opinion or Order Filing 61 ORDER (1) Overruling Plaintiff's objections; (2) Adopting Report and Recommendation in its entirety; and (3) Granting Defendant's motion for summary judgment. (ECF Nos. 41 , 46 , 55 . Signed by Judge Janis L. Sammartino on 7/31/2019. (All non-registered users served via U.S. Mail Service)(jpp)
August 28, 2018 Opinion or Order Filing 50 ORDER: (1) Adopting 46 Report and Recommendation, and (2) Granting Defendant's 41 Motion for Summary Judgment. The Court adopts in its entirety Judge Burkhardts Report & Recommendation, and grants Defendant s Motion for Summary Judgment Signed by Judge Janis L. Sammartino on 8/28/2018. (All non-registered users served via U.S. Mail Service)(mpl)
June 25, 2018 Opinion or Order Filing 46 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION re 41 MOTION for Summary Judgment filed by A.T. Ramos. It is recommended that the Court issue an Order: 1.) approving and adopting this Report and Recommendation, and 2.) directing that Defendant's motion for summary judgment be granted. Objections to R&R due by 7/23/2018. Replies due by 8/6/2018. Signed by Magistrate Judge Jill L. Burkhardt on 6/25/2018. (All non-registered users served via U.S. Mail Service) (jah)
April 17, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 29 ORDER Denying Plaintiff's 28 Third Motion to Request Appointment of Counsel. Signed by Magistrate Judge Jill L. Burkhardt on 4/17/2017. (All non-registered users served via U.S. Mail Service)(dxj)
February 3, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 27 ORDER: (1) Adopting 23 Report and Recommendation; (2) Granting In Part And Denying In Part Defendants' 9 Motion to Dismiss. It is ordered that plaintiff shall file an amended complaint, if any on or before 3/3/2017. Failure to file an amended complaint by this date may result in dismissal. Signed by Judge Janis L. Sammartino on 2/3/2017. (All non-registered users served via U.S. Mail Service)(dxj)
January 13, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 26 ORDER denying 25 Plaintiff's Second Motion to Request Appointment of Counsel. Signed by Magistrate Judge Jill L. Burkhardt on 1/13/2017. (All non-registered users served via U.S. Mail Service)(kcm)
December 9, 2016 Opinion or Order Filing 22 ORDER denying 21 Motion to Request Appointment of Counsel. Signed by Magistrate Judge Jill L. Burkhardt on 12/9/2016. (All non-registered users served via U.S. Mail Service)(kcm)
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 Southern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: McGinnis v. Ramos
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Anthony McGinnis
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: A.T. Ramos
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?