MITCHELL v. MATTIS et al
RONALD SCOTT MITCHELL |
JAMES N. MATTIS, KIRSTJEN M. NIELSEN and SERVICE PARTNERS ASSOCIATES |
1:2018cv01965 |
August 22, 2018 |
US District Court for the District of Columbia |
Tanya S Chutkan |
Other Statutory Actions |
28 U.S.C. ยง 1346 |
None |
Docket Report
This docket was last retrieved on September 20, 2018. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
Document Text |
---|
Filing 4 MOTION for CM/ECF Password by RONALD SCOTT MITCHELL (ztd) |
Filing 3 RETURN OF SERVICE/AFFIDAVIT of Summons and Complaint Executed. JAMES N. MATTIS served on 8/28/2018; KIRSTJEN M. NIELSEN served on 8/28/2018; SERVICE PARTNERS ASSOCIATES served on 8/28/2018, RETURN OF SERVICE/AFFIDAVIT of Summons and Complaint Executed on United States Attorney General. Date of Service Upon United States Attorney General 8/31/18., RETURN OF SERVICE/AFFIDAVIT of Summons and Complaint Executed as to the United States Attorney. Date of Service Upon United States Attorney on 8/31/2018. ( Answer due for ALL FEDERAL DEFENDANTS by 10/30/2018.) (ztd) |
Filing 2 MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis by RONALD SCOTT MITCHELL. (ztl) |
Filing 1 COMPLAINT against JAMES N. MATTIS, KIRSTJEN M. NIELSEN, SERVICE PARTNERS ASSOCIATES ( Filing fee $ 400, receipt number 4616094239) filed by RONALD SCOTT MITCHELL. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet)(jf) |
SUMMONS (5) Issued as to JAMES N. MATTIS, KIRSTJEN M. NIELSEN, SERVICE PARTNERS ASSOCIATES, U.S. Attorney and U.S. Attorney General (jf) |
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 District Of Columbia 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.