Archuleta v. California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation et al
| Noelia Archuleta |
| California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, Richard J. Donovan Correctional Facility, Ent Associates Medical Group, Tri-City Medical Center and Does 1 through 20 inclusive |
| 3:2023cv00781 |
| April 28, 2023 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of California |
| Gonzalo P Curiel |
| Bernard G Skomal |
| Civil Rights: Other |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 d Civil Rights (Death) |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on April 28, 2023. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 2 Summons Issued. Counsel receiving this notice electronically should print this summons and serve it in accordance with Rule 4, Fed.R.Civ.P and LR 4.1. Summons has been provided to plaintiffs not receiving notice electronically. (bdc) (sjt). |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT with Jury Demand against California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, Does 1 through 20 inclusive, Ent Associates Medical Group, Richard J. Donovan Correctional Facility, Tri-City Medical Center ( Filing fee $ 402 receipt number 145185.), filed by Noelia Archuleta. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet, #2 Receipt)The new case number is 3:23-cv-781-GPC-BGS. Judge Gonzalo P. Curiel and Magistrate Judge Bernard G. Skomal are assigned to the case.(bdc) (sjt). |
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.
