Kai Ingram v. B. Rudzienski, et al
| KAI D. INGRAM |
| B. RUDZIENSKI, Greene Hearing Examiner |
| 23-2145 |
| June 26, 2023 |
| U.S. Court of Appeals, Third Circuit |
| Prison Condition |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on July 24, 2023. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 11
ORDER (Clerk) The foregoing motion to proceed in forma pauperis is granted. Appellant is a prisoner and seeks to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal. Appellant is required to pay the full $505.00 fee in installments regardless of the outcome of the appeal. 28 U.S.C. Section 1915 (b). The Court hereby directs the warden or his or her designee to assess an initial filing fee, when funds are available, of 20% of the greater of (a) the average monthly deposits to the prisoners account; or (b) the average monthly balance in the prisoners account for the six-month period immediately preceding the filing of the notice of appeal. The warden, or his or her designee, shall calculate, collect, and forward the initial payment assessed in this order to the United States District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania. In each succeeding month when the amount in the prisoners account exceeds $10.00, the warden, or his or her designee, shall forward payments to the United States District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania equaling 20% of the preceding months income credited to the prisoners account until the fees are paid. Each payment shall reference the appellate docket number for this appeal. The warden, or his or her designee, shall forward payments to the appropriate courts simultaneously if there are multiple orders. In addition to the jurisdictional issue set forth in the letter of June 29, 2023, the appeal will be submitted to a panel of this court for determination under 28 U.S.C. Section 1915(e)(2) as to whether the appeal will be dismissed as legally frivolous or whether summary action under Third Circuit L.A.R. 27.4 and I.O.P. 10.6 is appropriate. In making this determination, the district court opinion and record will be examined. Appellant may submit argument, which should not exceed 5 pages, in support of the appeal. The document, with certificate of service, must be filed with the clerk within 21 days of the date of this order. Appellee need not file a response unless directed to do so. The court may reconsider in forma pauperis status at any time. (SB) [Entered: 07/24/2023 11:50 AM]
|
| Filing 10 ECF FILER: Response filed by Appellee B. Rudzienski to Legal Division letter. Certificate of Service dated 07/19/2023. [23-2145] (ATK) [Entered: 07/19/2023 03:52 PM] |
| Filing 9 IN FORMA PAUPERIS PRISONER ADDENDUM on behalf of Appellant Kai D. Ingram. (SB) [Entered: 07/18/2023 03:56 PM] |
| Filing 8 IN FORMA PAUPERIS PRISONER AUTHORIZATION on behalf of Appellant Kai D. Ingram. (SB) [Entered: 07/18/2023 03:55 PM] |
| Filing 7 PRISONER ACCOUNT STATEMENT on behalf of Appellant Kai D. Ingram. (SB) [Entered: 07/18/2023 03:54 PM] |
| Filing 6 MOTION filed by Appellant Kai D. Ingram to Proceed In Forma Pauperis. Response due on 07/24/2023. Certificate of Service dated 07/11/2023. Service made by US mail. (SB) [Entered: 07/18/2023 03:53 PM] |
| Filing 5 ECF FILER: ENTRY OF APPEARANCE from Anthony Thomas Kovalchick on behalf of Appellee(s) B. Rudzienski, Michael J. Zaken, S. Daivs, Milliken, J. Sibauda, M. Guyton, David Lemasters, Allen Lynch, Ed Morris, Matthew Mackey, M. Darr, Zachary J. Moslak, D. Varner, J. Soikerum, Deborah L. Carpenter. [23-2145] (ATK) [Entered: 07/11/2023 10:52 AM] |
| Filing 4 LEGAL DIVISION LETTER SENT advising that the case has been listed for possible dismissal due to jurisdictional defect. (ZM) [Entered: 06/29/2023 04:13 PM] |
|
Filing 3
ORDER (Clerk) for all parties represented by Pennsylvania Office of Attorney General, Esq. the designated filer shall be B. Rudzienski. (SB) [Entered: 06/26/2023 12:41 PM]
|
| Filing 2 RECORD available on District Court CM/ECF. (SB) [Entered: 06/26/2023 12:39 PM] |
| Filing 1 CIVIL CASE DOCKETED. Notice filed by Appellant Kai D. Ingram in District Court No. 2-22-cv-00042. (SB) [Entered: 06/26/2023 12:34 PM] |
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: Kai Ingram v. B. Rudzienski, 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 / appellant: KAI D. INGRAM | |
| Represented By: | Kai D. Ingram |
| 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: B. RUDZIENSKI, Greene Hearing Examiner | |
| Represented By: | Amelia J. Goodrich Esq. |
| Represented By: | Anthony T. Kovalchick Esq. |
| 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.
