Scott v. Cates et al
| Ellis Bernard Scott |
| B. Cates and Rob Bonta |
| 3:2022cv01101 |
| July 25, 2022 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of California |
| Jill L Burkhardt |
| Robert S Huie |
| Habeas Corpus (General) |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State) |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on July 7, 2023. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 5
ORDER denying #4 Motion for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis. Case Closed Deadline 10/31/2022.. Signed by District Judge Robert S. Huie on 8/31/2022. (All non-registered users served via U.S. Mail Service)(alns) (jms).
|
|
Filing 4
MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis by Ellis Bernard Scott. (smy1)
|
|
Filing 3
ORDER Denying #2 Motion to Proceed in Forma Pauperis and Dismissing Case Without Prejudice. Signed by District Judge Robert S. Huie on 8/1/2022. (All non-registered users served via U.S. Mail Service)(ave)
|
|
Filing 2
MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis by Ellis Bernard Scott. (smy1)
|
|
Filing 1
Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus against Rob Bonta, B. Cates (Filing fee $5, fee not paid, IFP filed.), filed by Ellis Bernard Scott. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet)The new case number is 3:22-cv-1101-RSH-JLB. Judge Robert S. Huie and Magistrate Judge Jill L. Burkhardt are assigned to the case.(smy1)
|
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.
