Jones v. Madden et al
Plaintiff: Rayon Jones
Defendant: Raymond Madden and ICC Committee
Case Number: 3:2022cv01681
Filed: October 26, 2022
Court: US District Court for the Southern District of California
Presiding Judge: Michael M Anello
Referring Judge: Lupe Rodriguez
Nature of Suit: Prisoner: Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 pr Prisoner Civil Rights
Jury Demanded By: Plaintiff
Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on November 10, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
November 10, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 6 ORDER DISMISSING CASE. Signed by Judge Michael M. Anello on 11/10/2022.(All non-registered users served via U.S. Mail Service)(alns) (jms).
November 8, 2022 Filing 5 Prisoner Trust Fund Account Statement from Richard J. Donovan Correctional Facility - Trust Office. (smy1)
November 8, 2022 Filing 4 GO653A COMPLAINT with Jury Demand against ICC Committee, Raymond Madden (Filing fee $402, fee not paid, IFP not filed.), filed by Rayon Jones. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet, #2 Exhibits)The new case number is 3:22-cv-1681-MMA-LR. Judge Michael M. Anello and Magistrate Judge Lupe Rodriguez, Jr. are assigned to the case.[Case in Screening per 28 USC 1915] (smy1)
October 31, 2022 Filing 3 Prisoner Trust Fund Account Statement from Richard J. Donovan Correctional Facility - Trust Office. (smy1)
October 28, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 2 Notice of Document Discrepancies and Order Thereon by Judge Michael M. Anello Rejecting re #1 Complaint, from Plaintiff Rayon Jones. Non-compliance with local rule(s), Initial case filings (42 U.S.C. 1983 Complaint, Motion to Proceed In Forma Pauperis, etc.) received by U.S. Mail and not properly e-filed in accordance with S.D. Cal. General Order 653A;. IT IS HEREBY ORDERED: The document is rejected. It is ordered that the Clerk STRIKE the document from the record, and serve a copy of this order on all parties. Signed by Judge Michael M. Anello on 10/28/2022. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet, #2 Exhibits)(All non-registered users served via U.S. Mail Service)(smy1)
October 26, 2022 Filing 1 **Document Stricken per #2 ** COMPLAINT with Jury Demand against ICC Committee, Raymond Madden (Filing fee $402, fee not paid, IFP not filed.), filed by Rayon Jones. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet, #2 Exhibits)The new case number is 3:22-cv-1681-MMA-LR. Judge Michael M. Anello and Magistrate Judge Lupe Rodriguez, Jr. are assigned to the case.[Case in Screening per 28 USC 1915] (smy1) (Main Document 1 replaced on 10/28/2022) (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 this case: Jones v. Madden et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Rayon Jones
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 ]
Defendant: Raymond Madden
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 ]
Defendant: ICC Committee
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?