Kyte v. Mayes et al
| Megan Kyte |
| Steve Mayes and Oregonian, The |
| 1:2022cv02392 |
| September 15, 2022 |
| US District Court for the District of Colorado |
| Lewis T Babcock |
| Gordon P Gallagher |
| Assault Libel & Slander |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1332 Diversity-Libel,Assault,Slander |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on November 10, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 11 USCA Case Number 22-1397 for #9 Notice of Appeal filed by Megan Kyte. (athom, ) |
| Filing 10 LETTER Transmitting Notice of Appeal to all counsel advising of the transmittal of the #9 Notice of Appeal filed by Megan Kyte to the U.S. Court of Appeals. (Pro Se, Fee not paid and 1915 motion not filed, IFP status on appeal denied in final order,) (Attachments: #1 Docket Sheet, #2 Preliminary Record) (athom, ) |
| Filing 9 NOTICE OF APPEAL as to #6 Order of Dismissal and Imposing Filing Restrictions, #7 Clerk's Judgment by Plaintiff Megan Kyte. (athom, ) |
| Filing 8 NOTICE of Change of Address or Phone Number by Plaintiff Megan Kyte. (athom, ) |
| Filing 7 JUDGMENT by Clerk re: #6 Order Dismissing Action and Imposing Restrictions on 10/31/2022. (athom, ) |
Filing 6
ORDER DISMISSING ACTION AND IMPOSING FILING RESTRICTIONS. The Complaint (ECF No. #1 ) and this action are dismissed with prejudice pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii) as barred by the applicable statute of limitations. IFP on appeal is denied without prejudice. Plaintiff is prohibited from filing any new action in the United States District Court for the District of Colorado without the representation of a licensed attorney admitted to practice in the District of Colorado unless she obtains permission to proceed pro se as described in this order. The Clerk of the Court shall add Plaintiff to the list of sanctioned litigants. By Judge Lewis T. Babcock on 10/31/2022. (athom, )
|
| Filing 5 LETTER re: #4 Order to Show Cause, by Plaintiff Megan Kyte. (sdunb, ) |
|
Filing 4
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE. It is ORDERED that Plaintiff shall show cause within thirty (30) days from the date of this order (1) why this action should not be dismissed as barred by the applicable statute or statutes of limitations, and (2) why the United States District Court for the District of Colorado should not enjoin her from filing any civil action in this Court, in which she is the proponent of a claim, without representation of an attorney licensed to practice in the State of Colorado, unless she first obtains leave of Court by a judicial officer to proceed pro se in the action. It is FURTHER ORDERED that, if Plaintiff fails to show cause within the time allowed, an order imposing filing restrictions and dismissing this action shall be entered by the Court. It is FURTHER ORDERED that at this time the only proper filing is a Response to this Order to Show Cause. Other submitted documents will be ordered stricken. It is FURTHER ORDERED that the #3 Application to Proceed in District Court Without Prepaying Fees or Costs (Long Form) is granted. By Magistrate Judge Gordon P. Gallagher on 9/23/2022. (sdunb, )
|
| Filing 3 Application to Proceed in District Court Without Prepaying Fees or Costs (Long Form) by Plaintiff Megan Kyte. (jtorr, ) |
| Filing 2 Case assigned to Magistrate Judge Gordon P. Gallagher. Text Only Entry. (jtorr, ) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT against Steve Mayes, Oregonian, The, filed by Megan Kyte. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet, #2 Proposed Summons)(jtorr, ) |
Access additional case information on PACER
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the Colorado District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
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.
