Nevarez v. Godwin et al
| Ruben Nevarez |
| Rod Godwin and Matthew Rodriguez |
| 3:2021cv01040 |
| May 28, 2021 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of California |
| San Diego Office |
| Michael M Anello |
| Ruth Bermudez Montenegro |
| Habeas Corpus (General) |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 2254 |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on September 1, 2023. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 3
ORDER Denying #2 In Forma Pauperis Application; Dismissing Action without Prejudice. Because it appears Petitioner can pay the requisite filing fee, the Court DENIES Petitioner's request to proceed in forma pauperis and DISMISSES this habeas action without prejudice. To have the case reopened, Petitioner must submit a copy of this Order along with either: (1) the $5.00 filing fee or (2) adequate proof of his inability to do so, on or before August 2, 2021. Signed by Judge Michael M. Anello on 6/3/2021. (All non-registered users served via U.S. Mail Service) (tcf)
|
|
Filing 2
MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis by Ruben Nevarez. (jms)(jrd)
|
|
Filing 1
Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus Against Rod Godwin, Matthew Rodriguez, filed by Ruben Nevarez. ($5.00 Filing Fee, Fee Not Paid, IFP Filed) (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet)The new case number is 3:21-cv-1040-MMA-RBM. Judge Michael M. Anello and Magistrate Judge Ruth Bermudez Montenegro 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 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.
