Riley v. Kernan et al
| Steven E. Riley |
| S Kernan, W. L. Montgomery, B. Hedrick, L. Paul, G Chavarria, J. Hatfield, E. Uribe, G.Z. Hernandez, C. Imada, R. Witte, R Garcia, J. Price, M Whitman, L. Newman and C Espitia |
| 3:2016cv00405 |
| February 17, 2016 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of California |
| San Diego Office |
| XX US, Outside State |
| Jan M. Adler |
| Michael M. Anello |
| Prisoner: Civil Rights |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 pr Prisoner Civil Rights |
| 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
132
CLERK'S JUDGMENT. IT IS SO ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that judgment is in favor of B. Hedrick, C Espitia, C. Imada, C. Macias, E. Uribe, G Chavarria, G.Z. Hernandez, J. Grima, J. Hatfield, J. Price, J.L. Prado, L. Newman, L. Paul, M Whitman, R Garcia, R. Witte, S Kernan, S. Cowey, W. L. Montgomery against Steven E. Riley. Signed by Judge Michael M. Anello on 12/5/2022. (smy1)(jrd)
|
|
Filing
128
ORDER OF TRANSFER. Magistrate Judge Allison H. Goddard is no longer assigned. Case reassigned to Magistrate Judge David D. Leshner for all further proceedings. The new case number is 16-cv-00405-MMA-DDL. Signed by Magistrate Judge Allison H. Goddard on 8/15/2022. (tcf)
|
|
Filing
127
ORDER Denying Motion to Certify Order for Interlocutory Appeal (Doc. No. 123 ). Signed by Judge Michael M. Anello on 4/15/2022. (jrm)
|
|
Filing
120
ORDER Granting 119 Joint Motion to Stay. Upon due consideration, good cause appearing, the Court GRANTS the joint motion and STAYS this action pending adjudication of the interlocutory appeal. Signed by Judge Michael M. Anello on 1/20/2022. (tcf)
|
|
Filing
114
ORDER: (1) Denying 113 Motion to Reopen Discovery without Prejudice; and (2) Setting Deadline to Send Joint Email to Court per Chambers Rules. Counsel for Plaintiff must meet and confer with defense counsel to determine whether Defendants will agree to reopening discovery. If they do not agree, counsel should send a joint email to Judge Goddard's chambers in compliance with the Chambers Rules no later than 1/18/2022. Signed by Magistrate Judge Allison H. Goddard on 1/4/2022. (tcf)
|
|
Filing
96
ORDER Granting in Part and Denying in Part 94 Ex Parte Application to Change Time to File Dispositive Pretrial Motions. Defendants' deadline to file dispositive pretrial motions, including motions for summary judgment and motions addressing Daubert issues, is hereby extended to8/20/2021. Signed by Magistrate Judge Linda Lopez on 6/23/2021. (All non-registered users served via U.S. Mail Service) (tcf)
|
|
Filing
92
ORDER granting in part and denying in part 90 Plaintiff's Motion to Compel. Signed by Magistrate Judge Linda Lopez on 2/19/2021. (All non-registered users served via U.S. Mail Service)(sjt)
|
|
Filing
91
ORDER: (1) Denying 87 Plaintiff's Motion for Appointment of Counsel; (2) Denying 89 Plaintiff's Request for Hearing Date and Time for Ninety-Day Extension of Discovery. Signed by Magistrate Judge Linda Lopez on 2/11/2021. (All non-registered users served via U.S. Mail Service) (tcf)
|
|
Filing
85
ORDER Denying as Moot 84 Plaintiff's Request for Hearing Date and Time for Motion to Compel Discovery. Signed by Magistrate Judge Linda Lopez on 1/28/2021. (All non-registered users served via U.S. Mail Service) (tcf)
|
|
Filing
82
ORDER (1) Denying 81 Plaintiff's Application for Hearing Date and Time for Motion to Compel, and (2) Ordering Meet and Confer. Signed by Magistrate Judge Linda Lopez on 1/15/2021. (All non-registered users served via U.S. Mail Service) (tcf)
|
|
Filing
77
ORDER Granting in Part and Denying in Part 74 Plaintiff's Application for 60-Day Extension of Time; and Denying 76 Plaintiff's Application for Appointment of Counsel. The Court finds good cause to continue the date for the deadline to file any motion to join other parties, amend the pleadings, or to file additional pleadings from 9/18/2020 to 11/18/2020. All other deadlines and requirements set forth in this Court's 8/21/2020 Scheduling Order shall remain as previously set. ECF No. 68 . Signed by Magistrate Judge Linda Lopez on 10/19/2020. (All non-registered users served via U.S. Mail Service) (tcf)
|
|
Filing
73
ORDER Denying as Moot 72 Plaintiff's Application for Hearing Day and Time for Two Motions. Signed by Magistrate Judge Linda Lopez on 9/11/2020. (All non-registered users served via U.S. Mail Service) (tcf)
|
|
Filing
70
ORDER Granting 69 Ex Parte Application to Take the Deposition of Steven E. Riley (C60512), an Incarcerated Person. Signed by Magistrate Judge Linda Lopez on 9/8/2020. (All non-registered users served via U.S. Mail Service) (tcf)
|
|
Filing
59
ORDER Responding to 58 Referral Notice. After review of the record herein, the Court concludes that Plaintiff's appeal lacks any arguable basis in law or fact, and thus is considered as not being taken "in good faith" pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3). Accordingly, the Court hereby REVOKES Plaintiff's IFP status. The Clerk of the Court is directed to notify the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals of this Order. Signed by Judge Michael M. Anello on 9/1/2017. (USCA Case Number 17-56298. Order electronically transmitted to the US Court of Appeals. All non-registered users served via U.S. Mail Service.) (akr)
|
|
Filing
54
CLERK'S JUDGMENT. IT IS SO ORDERED AND ADJUDGED the Court GRANTS Defendants' motions to dismiss and DISMISSES Plaintiff's First Amended Complaint without leave to amend. The Clerk of Court is instructed to enter judgment accordingly and close the case. (All non-registered users served via U.S. Mail Service)(aef)
|
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.
