Tenzin v. United States Post Office
| Jigme Tenzin |
| United States Post Office, (Branch) |
| 22-3004 |
| November 23, 2022 |
| U.S. Court of Appeals, Second Circuit |
| TORTS INJURY-Other Personal |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on December 13, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 14 CURED DEFECTIVE MOTION, to proceed in forma pauperis, [ # 7 ], [ # 13 ], on behalf of Appellant Jigme Tenzin, FILED.[3435591] [22-3004] [Entered: 12/13/2022 10:05 AM] |
| Filing 13 MOTION, to proceed in forma pauperis, on behalf of Appellant Jigme Tenzin, FILED. Service date 11/29/2022 by US mail.[3435588] [22-3004] [Entered: 12/13/2022 10:04 AM] |
| Filing 12 ORAL ARGUMENT STATEMENT LR 34.1 (a), on behalf of filer Appellant Jigme Tenzin, FILED. Service date 11/29/2022 by US mail. [3435586] [22-3004] [Entered: 12/13/2022 10:03 AM] |
| Filing 11 FORM D-P, on behalf of Appellant Jigme Tenzin, FILED. Service date 11/29/2022 by US mail.[3435585] [22-3004] [Entered: 12/13/2022 10:03 AM] |
| Filing 10 ACKNOWLEDGMENT AND NOTICE OF APPEARANCE FORM, on behalf of Party Jigme Tenzin, FILED. Service date 11/29/2022 by US mail.[3435580] [22-3004] [Entered: 12/13/2022 10:02 AM] |
| Filing 9 ACKNOWLEDGMENT AND NOTICE OF APPEARANCE, on behalf of Appellee United States Post Office, FILED. Service date 12/08/2022 by CM/ECF, US mail.[3433560] [22-3004] [Entered: 12/08/2022 04:02 PM] |
| Filing 8 LETTER, on behalf of Appellee United States Post Office, informing the Court that the Appellee will not participate unless requested to do so by this Court, RECEIVED. Service date 12/08/2022 by CM/ECF, US mail.[3433558] [22-3004]--[Edited 12/13/2022 by HT] [Entered: 12/08/2022 04:01 PM] |
| Filing 7 DEFECTIVE DOCUMENT, Motion, to proceed in forma pauperis, [ # 5 ], on behalf of Appellant Jigme Tenzin, copy to pro se, FILED.[3426630] [22-3004] [Entered: 11/28/2022 12:01 PM] |
| Filing 6 INSTRUCTIONAL FORMS, to Pro Se litigant, SENT.[3426619] [22-3004] [Entered: 11/28/2022 11:57 AM] |
| Filing 5 MOTION, to proceed in forma pauperis, on behalf of Appellant Jigme Tenzin, FILED. Service date 11/21/2022 by US mail.[3426617] [22-3004] [Entered: 11/28/2022 11:57 AM] |
| Filing 4 ELECTRONIC INDEX, in lieu of record, FILED.[3426612] [22-3004] [Entered: 11/28/2022 11:55 AM] |
| Filing 3 DISTRICT COURT JUDGMENT, dated 11/07/2022, RECEIVED.[3426608] [22-3004] [Entered: 11/28/2022 11:53 AM] |
| Filing 2 DISTRICT COURT ORDER, dated 11/07/2022, RECEIVED.[3426605] [22-3004] [Entered: 11/28/2022 11:53 AM] |
| Filing 1 NOTICE OF CIVIL APPEAL, with district court docket, on behalf of Appellant Jigme Tenzin, FILED. [3426583] [22-3004] [Entered: 11/28/2022 11:48 AM] |
Access additional case information on PACER
Access the Case Summary and Docket Report to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
| Search for this case: Tenzin v. United States Post Office | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Plaintiff / appellant: Jigme Tenzin | |
| Represented By: | Jigme Tenzin |
| 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 / appellee: United States Post Office, (Branch) | |
| Represented By: | Benjamin H. Torrance |
| 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.
