Lawrence Alvarado v. USDC-AZT
| LAWRENCE A. ALVARADO |
| UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA, TUCSON |
| In re: LAWRENCE A. ALVARADO |
| J. T. SHARTLE, Warden |
| 19-70222 |
| January 22, 2019 |
| U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit |
| Other |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on February 11, 2019. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 3 Received copy of District Court order filed on 02/06/2019. (1) Petitioner's motion to withdraw (Doc. 62) is granted and Petitioner's filings docketed at 50-55, 57, and 58 are withdrawn. (2) Petitioner's motion for leave to file his proposed Second Amended Petition (Doc. 59) is granted and the Second Amended Petition (Doc. 59-1) must be filed. (3) Petitioner's pending filings (Docs. 41-42 and 44-49) are denied. (4) Petitioner must obtain the leave of Court before filing any additional documents in this case except documents in furtherance of an appeal. (5) The Clerk of Court must transmit a copy of this Order to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in connection with Appeal No. 19-70222. [11189580] (RR) [Entered: 02/13/2019 04:18 PM] |
| Filing 2 Filed Petitioner Lawrence A. Alvarado motion for ext of time to pay filing fees; ifp motion. Deficiencies: None. [11187290] (RR) [Entered: 02/12/2019 11:45 AM] |
| Filing 1 FILED PROSE PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS. DOCKETED CAUSE AND ENTERED APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL. NOTIFIED REAL PARTIES IN INTEREST OF FILING. [11161510][COURT UPDATE: New Documents Attached, resent NDA,--[Edited 01/23/2019 by BY] (BY) [Entered: 01/22/2019 01:29 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.
