Clarence Lewis v. Kul Sood, et al
| LOIS LINDORFF, CATALINO BAUTISTA, LARA VOLMER, DINA PAUL and KUL B. SOOD, Doctor |
| CLARENCE LEWIS |
| 21-1646 |
| April 13, 2021 |
| U.S. Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit |
| Other |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on June 7, 2021. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 8 Prose motion filed by Appellant Clarence Lewis to proceed on appeal in forma pauperis. [8] [7165396] [21-1646] (CM) [Entered: 06/07/2021 04:13 PM] |
Filing 7
ORDER: The following is before the court: LETTER, filed by the pro se appellant on May 19, 2021. This appeal is subject to the Prison Litigation Reform Act and therefore all proceedings will remain suspended until the appellant's fee status has been determined. See Newlin v. Helman, 123 F.3d 429, 434 (7th Cir. 1997). A review of the court's docket indicates that the appellants fee status remains pending. Accordingly, to the extent that the appellant seeks recruitment of counsel, the motion is DENIED without court action, pursuant to the fee notice and order dated April 13, 2021. To the extent that the appellant seeks to proceed on appeal in forma pauperis, the clerk will treat the letter as the appellants PLRA memorandum and will update the docket accordingly. The appellants IFP paperwork is still incomplete, however, because it does not include the required asset affidavit. Accordingly, the appellant shall file the asset affidavit by June 21, 2021. The clerk shall send the appellant as asset affidavit form. [ # 6 ] [7] [7162022] CMD [21-1646] (FP) [Entered: 05/21/2021 12:59 PM]
|
| Filing 6 Letter Pro se motion filed by Appellant Clarence Lewis for appointment of counsel. [6] [7161484] [21-1646]--[Edited 05/21/2021 by FP to reflect correct doc. type, per CMD.] (CM) [Entered: 05/19/2021 03:01 PM] |
|
Filing 5
ORDER re: Letter, filed on April 29, 2021. The appellant is reminded that this appeal is subject to the Prison Litigation Reform Act and therefore the filing of a notice of appeal triggers the obligation to pay the $505.00 in filing fees. See 28 U.S.C. 1915(b). The appellant must either pay the $505.00 appellate fees in the district court or file a renewed motion for leave to proceed on appeal in forma pauperis with this court by May 20, 2021. [5] [7157399] SCR [21-1646] (ER) [Entered: 04/30/2021 03:07 PM]
|
| Filing 4 Filed letter from Appellant Clarence Lewis regarding filing fee. [4] [7157129] [21-1646] (CM) [Entered: 04/29/2021 02:49 PM] |
| Filing 3 Filed District Court order DENYING Appellant Clarence Lewis leave to proceed on appeal in forma pauperis. Date IFP denied: 04/20/2021. [3] [7155001] PLRA Fee/Motion/Memorandum due on 05/20/2021 [21-1646] (CM) [Entered: 04/20/2021 09:38 AM] |
| Filing 2 Circuit Rule 26.1 Disclosure Statement and Appearance filed by Attorney Julie A. Teuscher for Appellees Kul B. Sood, Lara Volmer, Catalino Bautista and Dina Paul. [2] [7154969] (L-Yes; E-Yes; R-Yes) [21-1646] [2] [7154969] [21-1646]--[Edited 04/20/2021 by ZNS to reflect the termination and addition of counsel] (Teuscher, Julie) [Entered: 04/20/2021 08:52 AM] |
| 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. Docketing Statement due for Appellant Clarence Lewis by 04/19/2021. PLRA Fee/Motion/Memorandum due on 05/13/2021. Transcript information sheet due by 04/27/2021. [1] [7153882] [21-1646] (ZNS) [Entered: 04/14/2021 10:16 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.
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.
