RAMDIAL v. HUMANA INC et al
| RISHI RAMDIAL |
| RICK BRADSHAW, CESAR CEDEMO, STEVE MCDONALD, PALM BEACH COUNT SHERIFF DEPARTMENT and HUMANA INC |
| 4:2020cv00516 |
| October 28, 2020 |
| US District Court for the Northern District of Florida |
| MARTIN A FITZPATRICK |
| T KENT WETHERELL |
| Prison Condition |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on December 29, 2020. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| ACTION REQUIRED BY MAGISTRATE JUDGE: Chambers of MAGISTRATE JUDGE MARTIN A FITZPATRICK notified that action is needed Re: 12/17/2020 Fee Deadline. Referred to MARTIN A FITZPATRICK. (rcb) |
| ACTION REQUIRED BY MAGISTRATE JUDGE: Chambers of MAGISTRATE JUDGE MARTIN A FITZPATRICK notified that action is needed Re: #7 Letter Requesting Extension of Time to Pay Partial Filing Fee Referred to MARTIN A FITZPATRICK. (rcb) |
| Filing 7 Letter Requesting Extension of Time to Pay Partial Filing Fee by RISHI RAMDIAL. (rcb) |
Filing 6
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION. It is respectfully RECOMMENDED that this case be DISMISSED with prejudice pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1915A(b) as it fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted and is otherwise barred pursuant to Heck v. Humphrey, 512 U.S. 477 (1994). Alternatively, the Court may dismiss the case for failure to comply with court orders pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b) and N.D. Fla. Loc. R. 41.1 and for want of prosecution. See also Moon v. Newsome, 863 F.2d 835, 837 (11th Cir. 1989) ("While dismissal is an extraordinary remedy, dismissal upon disregard of an order, especially where the litigant has been forewarned, generally is not an abuse of discretion."). It is also recommended that the case be CLOSED. Finally, it is recommended that the Order adopting this Report and Recommendation direct the Clerk of Court to note on the docket that this cause was dismissed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii). - R&R flag set. Signed by MAGISTRATE JUDGE MARTIN A FITZPATRICK on 12/02/2020. Internal deadline for referral to district judge if objections are not filed earlier: 12/30/2020. (rcb)
|
|
Filing 5
ORDER GRANTING #2 LEAVE TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS. The in forma pauperis motion, ECF No. #2 , is GRANTED to the extent Plaintiff is not required to prepay the $350.00 filing fee. Plaintiff has until November 30, 2020, to submit the initial partial filing fee. The Clerk of Court shall mail this Order with an appropriate cover letter to: Department of Corrections, Office of the General Counsel, 501 South Calhoun Street, Tallahassee, Florida 32399-2500. The Clerk of Court shall return this file upon payment of the assessed initial partial filing fee. Fee status updated to in forma pauperis. Signed by MAGISTRATE JUDGE MARTIN A FITZPATRICK on 10/30/2020. (rcb)
|
| Set Deadlines/Hearings Fee due & Notify Chambers by 11/30/2020. (rcb) |
| Filing 4 Notice to Pro Se (rcb) |
| ACTION REQUIRED BY MAGISTRATE JUDGE: Chambers of MAGISTRATE JUDGE MARTIN A FITZPATRICK notified that action is needed Re: #3 MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis, #1 Complaint, #2 Prisoner Consent Form & Financial Certificate Referred to MARTIN A FITZPATRICK. (rcb) |
| Filing 3 MOTION to Proceed In Forma Pauperis by RISHI RAMDIAL. (rcb) |
| Filing 2 Prisoner Consent Form & Financial Certificate by RISHI RAMDIAL (rcb) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT against RISHI RAMDIAL, filed by RISHI RAMDIAL. (rcb)**No service copy received** |
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 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.
