Gill v. Alexander
| Rudolfo Gill |
| Wade Alexander, Jordan Unit Assistant Warden, Antonious Flanagan, Captain, Carlos Mendoza, Lieutenant, Robert Coffey, Chow Hall Prison Guard, Gary Garner, Chow Hall Prison Guard, Jeremy Chance, Correctional Officer IV, Kailey Smiles, Correctional Officer III, Glen Stouder, Unit Grievance Officer, Misty Murrack, Medical Records, Michael Koehn, Medical Doctor, FNU Maxwell, Unit Lieutenant and Bobby Lumpkin, Director, Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Correctional Institutions Division |
| 23-10843 |
| August 17, 2023 |
| U.S. Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit |
| Prisoner - Civil Rights |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on August 28, 2023. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 10 DOCUMENT RECEIVED - NO ACTION TAKEN. No action will be taken at this time on the Motion Requesting Record on Appeal received from Appellant Mr. Rudolfo Gill because the motion is premature. In accordance with the clerk's notice of 8/21/23 the $505.00 filing fee is due [23-10843] (MRW) [Entered: 08/29/2023 11:00 AM] |
| Filing 9 INITIAL CASE CHECK by Attorney Advisor complete. Action: Case OK to Process. [9] Initial AA Check Due satisfied.. Fee or motion for IFP in DC due on 10/16/2023 for Appellant Rudolfo Gill [23-10843] (MVM) [Entered: 08/21/2023 10:38 AM] |
| Filing 4 CASE CAPTION updated. Additional appeal filed. [4] NOA filed by Appellant Mr. Rudolfo Gill. [4] [23-10843] (LEF) [Entered: 08/18/2023 10:43 AM] |
| Filing 1 PRISONER CASE WITHOUT COUNSEL docketed. NOA filed by Appellant Mr. Rudolfo Gill [23-10843] (CAS) [Entered: 08/17/2023 09:54 AM] |
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.
