MALONE v. UNITED STATES
Petitioner: CURTIS MALONE
Respondent: UNITED STATES
Case Number: 3:2013mc00044
Filed: May 13, 2013
Court: US District Court for the Northern District of Florida
Office: Pensacola Office
Presiding Judge: M CASEY RODGERS
Presiding Judge: CHARLES J KAHN
Nature of Suit: Other

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed Document Text
January 10, 2014 Opinion or Order Filing 10 ORDER adopting 9 Report and Recommendation. This case is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE for pla's failure to comply with an order of the Court, failure to prosecute, and failure to effect timely service. The Clerk is directed to close the file. Signed by CHIEF JUDGE M CASEY RODGERS on January 10, 2014. (kvg)
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 Florida Northern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: MALONE v. UNITED STATES
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Respondent: UNITED STATES
Represented By: BENJAMIN W BEARD
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 ]
Petitioner: CURTIS MALONE
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.


Why Is My Information Online?