Joseph Engel v. ERDCC, et al
| Lieutenant, Lieutenant Governor, Attorney General, Assistant Attorney General, Corrections Officer I, Superintendent, Captain, Governor, Senator, Correctional Caseworker Assistant, Caseworker, Assistant Warden, Functional Unit Manager, Eastern Reception, Diagnostic and Correctional Center, Sergeant and House of Representatives, Missouri |
| Joseph Michael Devon Engel |
| 21-2457 |
| June 30, 2021 |
| U.S. Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit |
| Other |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on August 10, 2021. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| MANDATE ISSUED. [5063814] [21-2457] (ALK) [Entered: 08/10/2021 08:16 AM] |
| JUDGE ORDER: The motion to reopen all closed cases has been considered and is denied. The court will not accept any additional filings in mandated cases and the clerk is directed to strike any filings in mandated cases. [ # 5062186-2 ] Adp July 2021 [5062311] [21-1021, 21-1045, 21-1066, 21-1078, 21-1096, 21-1125, 21-1129, 21-1155, 21-1156, 21-1209, 21-1210, 21-1217, 21-1239, 21-1249, 21-1313, 21-1329, 21-1358, 21-1413, 21-1414, 21-1415, 21-1416, 21-1427, 21-1429, 21-1473, 21-1482, 21-1486, 21-1487, 21-1488, 21-1491, 21-1493, 21-1494, 21-1497, 21-1498, 21-1500, 21-1501, 21-1502, 21-1505, 21-1507, 21-1509, 21-1510, 21-1515, 21-1542, 21-1555, 21-1596, 21-1597, 21-1790, 21-1810, 21-1813, 21-2000, 21-2005, 21-2009, 21-2064, 21-2071, 21-2072, 21-2075, 21-2390, 21-2404, 21-2449, 21-2454, 21-2457] (AMT) [Entered: 08/04/2021 02:33 PM] |
| MOTION to reopen cases, filed by Appellant Mr. Joseph Michael Devon Engel in 21-1021, 21-1045, 21-1066, 21-1078, 21-1096, 21-1125, 21-1129, 21-1155, 21-1156, 21-1210, 21-1209, 21-1217, 21-1239, 21-1249, 21-1313, 21-1329, 21-1358, 21-1413, 21-1414, 21-1415, 21-1416, 21-1427, 21-1429, 21-1473, 21-1482, 21-1486, 21-1487, 21-1488, 21-1491, 21-1493, 21-1494, 21-1497, 21-1500, 21-1501, 21-1498, 21-1502, 21-1505, 21-1507, 21-1509, 21-1510, 21-1515, 21-1542, 21-1555, 21-1560, 21-1596, 21-1597, 21-1790, 21-1810, 21-1813, 21-2000, 21-2005, 21-2009, 21-2016, 21-2064, 21-2071, 21-2072, 21-2075, 21-2077, 21-2390, 21-2404, 21-2449, 21-2454, 21-2457 w/service 08/04/2021. [5062186] [21-1021, 21-1045, 21-1066, 21-1078, 21-1096, 21-1125, 21-1129, 21-1155, 21-1156, 21-1209, 21-1210, 21-1217, 21-1239, 21-1249, 21-1313, 21-1329, 21-1358, 21-1413, 21-1414, 21-1415, 21-1416, 21-1427, 21-1429, 21-1473, 21-1482, 21-1486, 21-1487, 21-1488, 21-1491, 21-1493, 21-1494, 21-1497, 21-1498, 21-1500, 21-1501, 21-1502, 21-1505, 21-1507, 21-1509, 21-1510, 21-1515, 21-1542, 21-1555, 21-1560, 21-1596, 21-1597, 21-1790, 21-1810, 21-1813, 21-2000, 21-2005, 21-2009, 21-2016, 21-2064, 21-2071, 21-2072, 21-2075, 21-2077, 21-2390, 21-2404, 21-2449, 21-2454, 21-2457] (AMT) [Entered: 08/04/2021 01:00 PM] |
| JUDGMENT FILED - Appellant has failed to pay the filing fee or to demonstrate eligibility to proceed in forma pauperis under 28 U.S.C. sec. 1915(g). The appeal is dismissed. The full $505 appellate and docketing fees are assessed against the appellant. The court remands the collection of those fees to the district court. DISMISSED. STEVEN M. COLLOTON, JANE KELLY and L. STEVEN GRASZ Adp July 2021 [5056577] [21-2457] (HAG) [Entered: 07/20/2021 10:45 AM] |
| CASE SUBMITTED Ad Panel Submission before Judges Steven M. Colloton, Jane Kelly, L. Steven Grasz in St. Louis [5056571] [21-2457] (HAG) [Entered: 07/20/2021 10:36 AM] |
| MOTION for leave to proceed on appeal in forma pauperis w/attached affidavit, filed by Appellant Mr. Joseph Michael Devon Engel. [5055923] [21-2457] (AEV) [Entered: 07/19/2021 09:00 AM] |
| Prisoner case docketed. [5050742] [21-2457] (AEV) [Entered: 06/30/2021 01:31 PM] |
| Originating court document filed consisting of notice of appeal, Memorandumand Order 2/18/21, Order of Dismissal 2/18/21, Memorandum and Order 6/28/21, docket entries, [5050749] [21-2457] (AEV) [Entered: 06/30/2021 01:36 PM] |
| CLERK ORDER:This court has previously determined that Appellant has three strikes under 28 U.S.C Section 1915(g). Accordingly, Appellant may not proceed in this appeal without first paying the full appellate docketing fee. Appellant is directed to pay to the district court the appellate docketing fee of $505, or to file a pleading in this court explaining why Appellant is eligible to proceed without pre-payment of the fee. If appellant fails to either pay the fee or respond to this order within 30 days of the date of this order, the appeal will be dismissed for failure to prosecute. Compliance is due 07/30/2021 [5050752] [21-2457] (AEV) [Entered: 06/30/2021 01:38 PM] |
| CLERK ORDER:Appellant is directed to provide the court with a declaration under penalties of perjury or a notarized statement pursuant to Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 4(c)(1)(A) stating the date in which the notice of appeal was deposited in the institutions internal mail system. Response of Joseph Michael Devon Engel due 07/14/2021 [5050753] [21-2457] (AEV) [Entered: 06/30/2021 01:39 PM] |
| CLERK ORDER:If the original file of the United States District Court is available for review in electronic format, the court will rely on the electronic version of the record in its review. The appendices required by Eighth Circuit Rule 30A shall not be required. In accordance with Eighth Circuit Local Rule 30A(a)(2), the Clerk of the United States District Court is requested to forward to this Court forthwith any portions of the original record which are not available in an electronic format through PACER, including any documents maintained in paper format or filed under seal, exhibits, administrative records and state court files. These documents should be submitted within 10 days. [5050755] [21-2457] (AEV) [Entered: 06/30/2021 01:41 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.
