Alan Flesher v. USDC-CALA
| ALAN GREGORY FLESHER |
| UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, LOS ANGELES |
| In re: ALAN GREGORY FLESHER |
| UNITED STATES OF AMERICA |
| 19-70913 |
| April 15, 2019 |
| U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit |
| Other |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on May 30, 2019. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 4 Filed order (EDWARD LEAVY, CONSUELO M. CALLAHAN and CARLOS T. BEA) Petitioner has not demonstrated that this case warrants the intervention of this court by means of the extraordinary remedy of mandamus. See Bauman v. U.S. Dist. Court, 557 F.2d 650 (9th Cir. 1977). Accordingly, the petition is denied. The motions to proceed in forma pauperis (Docket Entry Nos. [ # 2 ] and [ # 3 ]) are denied as moot. No further filings will be entertained in this closed case. DENIED. [11314334] (JMR) [Entered: 05/30/2019 04:18 PM] |
| Filing 3 Filed Petitioner Alan Gregory Flesher supplemental motion to proceed In Forma Pauperis. Deficiencies: None. Served on 04/19/2019. [11279785] (CW) [Entered: 04/29/2019 07:07 AM] |
| Filing 2 Filed Petitioner Alan Gregory Flesher motion to proceed In Forma Pauperis. Deficiencies: None. Served on 04/10/2019. [11263751][COURT UPDATE: New Documents Attached, resent NDA,--[Edited 04/16/2019 by BY] (JBS) [Entered: 04/15/2019 12:13 PM] |
| Filing 1 FILED PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS. DOCKETED CAUSE AND ENTERED APPEARANCE OF PRO SE PETITIONER. NOTIFIED REAL PARTIES IN INTEREST OF FILING. (Motion for IFP within petition) [11263740][COURT UPDATE: New Documents Attached, resent NDA,--[Edited 04/16/2019 by BY] (JBS) [Entered: 04/15/2019 12:09 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.
