NABAYA v. LAUCK
| SHAPAT NABAYA |
| MARY HANNAH LAUCK |
| 1:2023cv02650 |
| September 5, 2023 |
| US District Court for the District of Columbia |
| Ana C Reyes |
| Civil Rights: Other |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1983 Civil Rights |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on October 25, 2023. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 9 MOTION to Amend #1 Complaint by SHAPAT NABAYA. (Attachments: #1 Summons, #2 Exhibit)(ztth) |
| Filing 8 MOTION to Amend re #1 Complaint by SHAPAT NABAYA. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet, #2 Summons) (ztth) |
| Filing 7 RETURN OF SERVICE/AFFIDAVIT of Summons and Complaint Executed as to the United States Attorney. Date of Service Upon United States Attorney on 10/10/2023. Answer due for ALL FEDERAL DEFENDANTS by 12/9/2023. (ztth) |
MINUTE ORDER: This matter is before the Court on sua sponte review of Plaintiff's #1 Complaint and amendments thereto. Plaintiff alleges that Judge Lauck "refused to protect [Plaintiffs] right to a Brady and Probable Cause hearing." Complaint at 4. The doctrine of absolute judicial immunity "shields federal judges from a suit for money damages" for actions taken in their judicial capacity. Smith v. Scalia, 44 F.Supp.3d 28, 41 (D.D.C. 2014), aff'd, No. 14-5180, 2015 WL 13710107 (D.C. Cir. Jan. 14, 2015). As such, Plaintiff shall SHOW CAUSE on or before October 11, 2023 why Plaintiff's Complaint should not be dismissed sua sponte for failure to state a claim. See Turan Petroleum, Inc. v. Ministry of Oil and Gas of Kaz., 406 F. Supp. 3d 1, 3 n.1 (D.D.C. 2019) (explaining circumstances where a court may dismiss complaint for failure to state a claim sua sponte). Signed by Judge Ana C. Reyes on 9/27/2023. (lcsj)
|
| Set/Reset Deadlines/Hearings: Plaintiff's response to Show Cause Order due by 10/11/2023. (zcdw) |
| SUMMONS (3) Issued as to MARY HANNAH LAUCK, U.S. Attorney and U.S. Attorney General. (ztth) |
| Filing 6 REQUEST FOR SUMMONS TO ISSUE filed by SHAPAT NABAYA. (ztth) |
| Filing 5 MOTION for Leave to File by SHAPAT NABAYA. (ztth) |
| Filing 4 MOTION to Amend/Correct #1 Complaint by SHAPAT NABAYA. (ztth) |
| Filing 3 MOTION for Leave to File AMENDED COMPLAINT filed by SHAPAT NABAYA. (Attachment #1 Proposed Amended Complaint) (mg). Modified event on 9/20/2023 (mg). |
| Filing 2 MOTION for Leave to File by SHAPAT NABAYA. (Attachment: #1 Exhibit)(ztth) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT against MARY HANNAH LAUCK (Filing fee $ 402, receipt number 205524) with Jury Demand filed by SHAPAT NABAYA. (Attachments: #1 Exhibits 1 - 4, #2 Civil Cover Sheet); (ztth) |
| SUMMONS Not Issued as to MARY HANNAH LAUCK. (ztth) Modified Date Filed on 9/11/2023 (ztth). |
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
| Search for this case: NABAYA v. LAUCK | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Plaintiff: SHAPAT NABAYA | |
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Finance | [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Defendant: MARY HANNAH LAUCK | |
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Finance | [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
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.
