Edson Toro v. Virginia Department of Probation & Parole
| EDSON TORO |
| VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF PAROLE AND PROBATION, JHOANY IGLESIA, RHODE ISLAND DEPARTMENT OF PROBATION & PAROLE and LYNN BORCH |
| 26-1467 |
| April 20, 2026 |
| U.S. Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit |
| Other Civil Rights |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on May 22, 2026. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 6 RULE 45 NOTICE issued to Edson Toro re: failure to satisfy fee and informal briefing requirements Case may be dismissed if default is not cured within 15 days. Mailed to: Jeremiah Johansen; Edson Toro. [1001983711] [26-1467] CH [Entered: 05/22/2026 12:44 PM] |
| Filing 5 NOTICE ISSUED re: case caption. Mailed to: Edson Toro, Jeremiah Johansen. [1001977108] [26-1467] CH [Entered: 05/12/2026 10:21 AM] |
| Filing 4 RECORD requested from Clerk of Court [1001963243]. Due: 05/04/2026. [26-1467] CH [Entered: 04/20/2026 01:21 PM] |
| Filing 3 INFORMAL BRIEFING ORDER filed. Mailed to: Edson Toro, Jeremiah Johansen. [1001963236] Informal Opening Brief due 05/14/2026. Informal response brief, if any: 14 days after informal opening brief served. [26-1467] CH [Entered: 04/20/2026 01:19 PM] |
| Filing 2 FEE NOTICE issued to Edson Toro - initial notice. Fee or application to proceed as indigent due 05/20/2026. Originating case number: 4:23-cv-00030-RAJ-LRL. Mailed to: Edson Toro, Jeremiah Johansen. [1001963232] [26-1467] CH [Entered: 04/20/2026 01:17 PM] |
| Filing 1 Case docketed. Originating case number: 4:23-cv-00030-RAJ-LRL. Case manager: CHalupa. [1001963221] [26-1467] CH [Entered: 04/20/2026 01:12 PM] |
Access additional case information on PACER
Access the Case Summary and Docket Report to access additional information about this case on the U.S. Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
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.
