Allen v. Buckel et al
Petitioner: Michael Dewayne Allen
Respondent: John Doe, R. Buckel and M. Pollard
Case Number: 3:2020cv01642
Filed: August 21, 2020
Court: US District Court for the Southern District of California
Presiding Judge: Gonzalo P Curiel
Referring Judge: Mitchell D Dembin
Nature of Suit: Habeas Corpus (General)
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 2254
Jury Demanded By: None
Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on September 2, 2020. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
September 2, 2020 Opinion or Order Filing 5 ORDER Denying in Forma Pauperis Application and Dismissing Without Prejudice. If Petitioner wishes to proceed with this action he must, on or before September 28, 2020, either pay the $5.00 filing fee or submit an application to proceed in forma pauperis which contains the proper prison certificate and file a First Amended Petition. Signed by Judge Gonzalo P. Curiel on 9/2/20.(All non-registered users served via U.S. Mail Service, including blank IFP & Amended 2254)(dlg)
September 2, 2020 Filing 4 MOTION to Appoint Counsel by Michael Dewayne Allen. Nunc Pro Tunc 8/31/20 (dlg)
September 2, 2020 Opinion or Order Filing 3 Notice of Document Discrepancies and Order Thereon by Magistrate Judge Mitchell D. Dembin Accepting Document: Motion for Appointment of Counsel, from Petitioner Michael Dewayne Allen. Non-compliance with local rule(s), Civ. L. Rule 5.1: Missing time and date on motion and/or supporting documentation, Civ. L. Rule 7.1: Lacking memorandum of points and authorities in support as a separate document. Nunc Pro Tunc 8/31/20. Signed by Magistrate Judge Mitchell D. Dembin on 9/2/20.(All non-registered users served via U.S. Mail Service)(dlg)
August 21, 2020 Filing 2 MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis by Michael Dewayne Allen. (jms)
August 21, 2020 Filing 1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus Against R. Buckel, M. Pollard, John Doe, filed by Michael Dewayne Allen. ($5.00 Filing Fee, Fee Not Paid, IFP Filed) (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet)The new case number is 3:20-cv-1642-GPC-MDD. Judge Gonzalo P. Curiel and Magistrate Judge Mitchell D. Dembin are assigned to the case.[Case in Screening] (jms)(jrd)

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: Allen v. Buckel et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Respondent: John Doe
Represented By: Attorney General
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 ]
Respondent: R. Buckel
Represented By: Attorney General
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 ]
Respondent: M. Pollard
Represented By: Attorney General
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 ]
Petitioner: Michael Dewayne Allen
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?