RAVAN v. DAVIS et al
| JOHN STEPHEN RAVAN |
| SHERIFF DAVID DAVIS, OFFICER TIDWELL and CORRECT HEALTH INC |
| 5:2025cv00511 |
| November 24, 2025 |
| U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Georgia |
| MARC T TREADWELL |
| Prisoner: Civil Rights |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 Civil Rights Act |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on June 11, 2026. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 10
RESPONSE to Court Order filed by JOHN STEPHEN RAVAN re #8 Order,,, Order Directing Service,, (Attachments: #1 Envelope)(rka)
|
|
Filing 9
ORDER (AI Disclosure). Plaintiff shall disclose the use of AI in all pleadings filed with the Court. Plaintiff shall file, no later than April 22, 2026, a signed statement disclosing whether Plaintiff used AI to prepare or draft the complaint. For all future pleadings prepared or drafted with the assistance of AI, Plaintiff shall include a signed statement fully disclosing the use of AI. Failure to comply with this Order shall result in sanctions, including, if appropriate, dismissal of this lawsuit. Ordered by US DISTRICT JUDGE MARC T TREADWELL on 4/1/2026. (kat)
|
|
Filing 8
ORDER. Count I may proceed against CorrectHealth and Sheriff Davis in his individual capacity. Count II may proceed against Officer Tidwell (F). Count IV may proceed against CorrectHealth. Ravan has 60 days from the entry of this Order, by May 30, 2026, to identify Defendant Intake Nurse and move to amend to assert Counts I and IV against her. ORDER Directing Service. It is ORDERED that service be made on defendants CorrectHealth, Inc., Officer Tidwell ("Female"), and Sheriff Davis by the United States Marshal Service. Ordered by US DISTRICT JUDGE MARC T TREADWELL on 4/1/2026. (kat)
|
|
Filing 7
AMENDED #1 Complaint, against All Defendants by JOHN STEPHEN RAVAN (Attachments: #1 Exhibit Patient Visit Information, #2 Cover Letter, #3 Envelope)(rka)
|
|
Filing 6
This is a text only entry; no document issued. ORDER GRANTING #5 Motion for Extension of Time to Amend. Plaintiff's request for an additional four days to file an amended complaint is GRANTED. Plaintiff shall have until January 17, 2026, to file an amended complaint. Ordered by U.S. DISTRICT JUDGE MARC T. TREADWELL on 1/13/2026. (agb)
|
|
Filing 5
MOTION for Extension of Time to Amend #1 Complaint, Filed by JOHN STEPHEN RAVAN. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit - Appointment Confirmation, #2 Envelope)(rka)
|
|
Filing 4
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE. Ravan shall SHOW CAUSE by January 26, 2026, why his complaint should not be dismissed for failure to comply with the Court's order. Ordered by US DISTRICT JUDGE MARC T TREADWELL on 1/12/2026. (kat)
|
|
Filing 3
ORDER GRANTING #2 Motion for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis. ORDER to Amend Complaint: Ravan is ORDERED to amend his complaint no later than January 9, 2026. Ordered by US DISTRICT JUDGE MARC T TREADWELL on 12/19/2025. (kat)
|
|
Filing 2
MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis Filed by JOHN STEPHEN RAVAN. (Attachments: #1 Affidavit of Indigency, #2 Trust Account Statement). (rka) Modified on 11/24/2025 - Motion is no longer referred. (rka).
|
|
Filing 1
COMPLAINT against All Defendants filed by JOHN STEPHEN RAVAN (Attachments: #1 Cover Letter, #2 Table of Authorities, #3 Waiver of Service of Summons, #4 Affidavit of Michael Petit, #5 Affidavit of john Gillespie, #6 Cover Letter 2, #7 Exhibit Atrium Health Medical Records, #8 Envelope)(rka)
|
Access additional case information on PACER
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the U.S. Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the Georgia Middle 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.
