NDONGA v. EMPOWR.COM et al
| MBETI VICTORIA NDONGA |
| UNITED STATES CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION SERVICES, SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION, EMPOWR.COM, IMMIGRATION CUSTOMS ENFORCEMENT, FAYETTE COUNTY SOLICITORS OFFICE and IMMIGRATION AND CUSTOMS ENFORCEMENT |
| 7:2020cv00028 |
| February 28, 2020 |
| US District Court for the Middle District of Georgia |
| THOMAS Q LANGSTAFF |
| HUGH LAWSON |
| Prisoner: Civil Rights |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on February 28, 2020. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 4 Consent Form (28 USC 636(c)(1)) sent to MBETI VICTORIA NDONGA. (sbd) |
Filing 3
ORDER REFERRING CASE to Magistrate Judge issued at the direction of the Court. (sbd)
|
| Filing 2 MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis filed by MBETI VICTORIA NDONGA. (Attachments: #1 Trust Account Statement, #2 Envelope) Motion(s) referred to THOMAS Q LANGSTAFF.(sbd) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT against EMPOWR.COM, FAYETTE COUNTY SOLICITORS OFFICE, IMMIGRATION CUSTOMS ENFORCEMENT, SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION, UNITED STATES CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION SERVICES, filed by MBETI VICTORIA NDONGA. (some pages writing is cut off original) (Attachments: #1 DHS documents, Fayette County documenets, IRS documents, #2 Civil Cover Sheet)(sbd) (Additional attachment(s) added on 2/28/2020: #3 Envelope) (sbd). |
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 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.
