Williams v. Navarro et al
| Lance Williams |
| O. Navarro, N.A. Officer Garsilaso, Estrada, A-Yard Bldg #2 Staff, C. Bagnol, F. Lewis, Hall, Litigation Dept of R.J.D., R. Katyall, S. Knittman, R.J.D. E.O.P. Scheduling Dept and C. Tiscornia |
| 3:2018cv01318 |
| June 18, 2018 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of California |
| San Diego Office |
| San Diego |
| Peter C. Lewis |
| Dana M. Sabraw |
| 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
129
ORDER denying 123 Motion to enforce Settlement and award of Attorney fees. Signed by Chief District Judge Dana M. Sabraw on 2/20/2024. (All non-registered users served via U.S. Mail Service)(jpp) Modified on 2/20/2024 to edit text, NEF resent to all parties. (jpp).
|
|
Filing
107
ORDER Following in Camera Review re 94 MOTION to Compel filed by Lance Williams. Signed by Magistrate Judge Ruth Bermudez Montenegro on 11/8/2021.(All non-registered users served via U.S. Mail Service)(zda)
|
|
Filing
92
ORDER Denying 91 Motion for Appointment of Counsel. Signed by Magistrate Judge Ruth Bermudez Montenegro on 2/17/2021. (All non-registered users served via U.S. Mail Service)(mme)
|
|
Filing
89
ORDER Granting 88 Defendants' Ex Parte Application to Take Depose Plaintiff Lance Williams, an Incarcerated Person. Defendants may depose Plaintiff by remote means and by video conference if they so choose. However, given the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, Defendants may only depose Plaintiff in accordance with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and the guidelines, rules, and regulations of the institution where Plaintiff is held in custody. Signed by Magistrate Judge Ruth Bermudez Montenegro on 1/12/2021. (All non-registered users served via U.S. Mail Service)(mme)
|
|
Filing
84
ORDER Denying 78 Plaintiff's Motion for Sanctions. Signed by Magistrate Judge Ruth Bermudez Montenegro on 11/19/2020. (All non-registered users served via U.S. Mail Service)(mme)
|
|
Filing
79
ORDER: Granting 65 Defendants' Motion to Dismiss Pursuant To Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6); and (2) Dismissing Count Two and Portions of Count One and Three of the First Amended Complaint With Prejudice. This matter will proceed with the remaining claims in the First Amended Complaint. Respondents Answer is due forty-five (45) days from the date this Order is filed. Signed by Judge Dana M. Sabraw on 11/2/2020. (All non-registered users served via U.S. Mail Service)(mme)
|
|
Filing
60
ORDER Denying Plaintiff's 59 Motion to Stay; and Granting Plaintiff an Additional Ninety (90) Days of Leave to File a First Amended Complaint. Signed by Magistrate Judge Ruth Bermudez Montenegro on 6/17/20. (All non-registered users served via U.S. Mail Service)(dlg)
|
|
Filing
52
ORDER: (1) Granting Defendants' Motion to Dismiss pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6); (2) Dismissing Counts Two and Three of the Complaint without Prejudice; (3) Dismissing Unserved Defendants without Prejudice; and (4) Granting Leave to Amend . The Court GRANTS the Motion to Dismiss by Defendants Bagnol, Knittman, Tiscornia, Lewis, Navarro, Katyal and Garsilaso [ECF No. 39 ] as well as the Joinder to the Motion to Dismiss by Defendants Estrada and Hall [ECF No. 50 ], and DISMISSES count s two and three of the Complaint without prejudice against Defendants Bagnol, Knittman, Tiscornia, Lewis, Navarro, Katyal, Garsilaso, Estrada and Hall pursuant to FED. R. CIV. P. 12(b)(6); DISMISSES without prejudice unserved Defendants A-Yard Buildi ng #2 Staff Corrections Officers, RJD Litigation Department Litigation Coordinators, and RJD EOP Scheduling Department Mental Health Care Scheduling Department pursuant to Fed.Civ.P. Rule 4(m) for lack of timely service; and GRANTS Plaintiff leave to file a First Amended Complaint within forty-five (45) days of the date this Order is filed. Signed by Judge Dana M. Sabraw on 2/10/2020. (All non-registered users served via U.S. Mail Service)(aef)
|
|
Filing
47
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION and Denying 20 Plaintiff's Motion for Protective Order and/or Injunctive Relief. This Court, having reviewed de novo the Magistrate Judge's R&R and the Supplement thereto, adopts the R&R in its entirety and denies Plaintiff's motion for a protective order and/or injunctive relief. Signed by Judge Dana M. Sabraw on 10/7/2019.(All non-registered users served via U.S. Mail Service)(aef)
|
|
Filing
36
SUPPLEMENT TO REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION of United States Magistrate Judge Dates July 9, 2019 Re: 20 , 23 Plaintiff's Addendum to Motion for Protective Order and/or Injunctive Relief. No later than August 28, 2019, any parties to this action m ay file written objections with the Court and serve a copy on all parties. Any reply to the objections shall be filed with the Court and served on all parties no later than September 27, 2019. Signed by Magistrate Judge Ruth Bermudez Montenegro on 7/29/2019.(All non-registered users served via U.S. Mail Service)(aef)
|
|
Filing
21
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION of U.S. Magistrate Judge Re: 20 Plaintiff's Motion for Protective Order and/or Injunctive Relief. IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that the Court issue an order ( 1) approving and adopting this Report and Recommendation; and (2) DENYING Plaintiff's Motion for Protective Order and or Injunctive Relief without prejudice (Doc. 20). No later than August 8, 2019, any parties to this action may file written objections with the Court and serve a copy on all parties. Any reply to the objections shall be filed with the Court and served on all parties no later than September 9, 2019. Signed by Magistrate Judge Ruth Bermudez Montenegro on 7/9/2019.(All non-registered users served via U.S. Mail Service)(aef)
|
|
Filing
6
ORDER: 1) Denying 2 Motion to Proceed in forma pauperis as barred by 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g) [ECF No. 2]; and 2) Dismissing Civil Action without Prejudice for Failure to Pay Filing Fee Required by 28 U.S.C. § 1914(a). The Court DENIES Plaint iff's Motion to Proceed IFP (ECF No. 2) as barred by 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g); DISMISSES this civil action without prejudice based on Plaintiff's failure to pay the full statutory and administrative $400 civil filing fee required by 28 U.S.C. § 1914(a); CERTIFIES that an IFP appeal from this Order would be frivolous and therefore, would not be taken in good faith pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3); DIRECTS the Clerk of Court to close the file. Signed by Judge Dana M. Sabraw on 9/6/2018. (All non-registered users served via U.S. Mail Service)(aef) (sjt).
|
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.
