Williams v. Janssen Pharmaceuticals Inc.
| Jarad W. Williams and Fluff Daddy |
| Janssen Pharmaceuticals Inc. |
| 3:2021cv50387 |
| October 12, 2021 |
| US District Court for the Northern District of Illinois |
| Philip G Reinhard |
| Margaret J Schneider |
| Prisoner: Civil Rights |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on December 8, 2021. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 9
ORDER signed by the Honorable Philip G. Reinhard on 12/8/2021: Plaintiff's motion for an extension of time #7 to pay the filing fee is granted. Plaintiff must pay the filing by January 8, 2022 if he wishes to proceed with this lawsuit. Failure to do so will result in summary dismissal of this lawsuit. Additionally, plaintiff's motions for attorney representation #3 #8 are denied without prejudice; this case is in its early stages and plaintiff is competent to proceed without a lawyer for purposes of addressing the payment of the filing fee. See Pickett v. Chicago Transit Auth., 930 F.3d 869, 871 (7th Cir. 2019) (motions for attorney representation are properly denied when it is too early in the case to determine whether the plaintiff can represent himself adequately). Electronic notice/mailed copy to plaintiff. (sb, )
|
| Filing 8 MOTION by Plaintiff Jarad W. Williams for attorney representation (Attachments: #1 Envelope) (jp, ) |
| Filing 7 MOTION by Plaintiff Jarad W. Williams for Extension of Time on Payment (Attachments: #1 Envelope) (jp, ) |
|
Filing 6
ORDER signed by the Honorable Philip G. Reinhard on 11/9/2021: Plaintiff's application for leave to proceed in forma pauperis #5 is denied for lack of a sufficient showing of indigence. If plaintiff wants to proceed with this case, he must pre-pay the $402 filing fee by December 15, 2021. Failure to do so will result in summary dismissal of this case. Electronic notice/mailed copy to plaintiff. (sb, )
|
| Filing 5 APPLICATION by Plaintiff Jarad W. Williams for leave to proceed in forma pauperis. (Exhibits). (jn, ) |
|
Filing 4
ORDER: Plaintiff Jarad W. Williams, a prisoner at Dixon Correctional Center, initiated this pro se civil rights action without prepaying the filing fee or seeking leave to proceed in forma pauperis. If plaintiff wants to pursue this litigation, he must pay the full statutory filing fee of $402 or submit an accurate and properly supported application for leave to proceed in forma pauperis. If plaintiff fails to do so by November 23, 2021, this case will be summarily dismissed. Plaintiff must promptly submit a change-of-address notification if he is released or transferred to another facility. Failure to do so will result in dismissal of this case for failure to comply with a court order and for want of prosecution. The Clerk is directed to send plaintiff a blank application for leave to proceed in forma pauperis and a copy of this order. The court defers its initial review of the complaint #1 and related pleadings #3 until plaintiff has resolved his fee status. Signed by the Honorable Philip G. Reinhard on 10/18/2021:Notice mailed by judicial staff (pg, )
|
| MAILED Blank I.F.P. Form Copy Of 10/18/21 Order to Jarad Williams (pg, ) |
| Filing 3 MOTION by Plaintiff Jarad W. Williams for attorney representation. (jp, ) |
| Filing 2 PRISONER CIVIL Cover Sheet. (jp, ) |
| Filing 1 RECEIVED COMPLAINT by Jarad W. Williams; (Attachments: #1 Certificate of Service, #2 Exhibit) (jp, ) |
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 Illinois 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.
