Joshua Mathews v. John Baldwin, et al
| LEO SMITH, KYLE DELONG, MICHAEL MELVIN, SUSAN PRENTICE, Lieutenant and JOHN BALDWIN |
| JOSHUA L. MATHEWS |
| 19-2548 |
| August 12, 2019 |
| U.S. Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit |
| Other |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on October 3, 2019. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 4 Filed District Court order DENYING Appellant Joshua L. Mathews leave to proceed on appeal in forma pauperis. Date IFP denied: 10/02/2019. [4] [7034539] PLRA Fee/Motion/Memorandum due on 11/04/2019. [19-2548] (DSL) [Entered: 10/03/2019 03:40 PM] |
| Filing 3 Notification from the District Court that a motion to proceed on appeal in forma pauperis is pending. [3] [7026486] [19-2548] (DSL) [Entered: 08/28/2019 10:32 AM] |
| Filing 2 THIS CAUSE CONSISTS OF MORE THAN 5 PARTIES FOR EITHER SIDE. The following are those parties to this cause as reflected on the District Court docket, yet are not reflected on the Appellate docket/caption for administrative purposes: APPELLEES: Shwata Switzer. [2] [7023066] [19-2548] (FP) [Entered: 08/12/2019 03:32 PM] |
| Filing 1 State prisoner's civil rights case docketed. IT IS ORDERED that this appeal is subject to the Prison Litigation Reform Act. Proceedings are SUSPENDED pending notification by the district court that any necessary fee has been assessed, and if assessed, paid. PLRA Fee due. Transcript information sheet due by 08/26/2019. Docketing Statement due for Appellant Joshua L. Mathews by 08/19/2019. PLRA Fee/Motion/Memorandum due on 09/11/2019. [1] [7023051] [19-2548] (FP) [Entered: 08/12/2019 03:17 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.
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.
