Dohm v. United States Attorney for the Northern District of Illinois et al
| J. Patrick Dohm |
| United States Attorney for the Northern District of Illinois and United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois |
| 3:2022cv50094 |
| March 31, 2022 |
| US District Court for the Northern District of Illinois |
| Lisa A Jensen |
| Iain D Johnston |
| Civil Rights: Other |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 2201 Declaratory Judgement |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on May 17, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 8 ENTERED JUDGMENT (yxp, ) |
| Filing 7 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Iain D. Johnston: On April 1, 2022, the Court ordered Plaintiff J. Patrick Dohm to either pay the Court's filing fee or file a motion to proceeding in forma pauperis by April 15, 2022. Dkt. 4. The Court then reminded Plaintiff about the April 15 deadline. Dkt. 6. A month after the deadline, Plaintiff has still failed to do either of those two options. Thus, the Court dismisses this action with prejudice for failure to prosecute. Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b). Civil case terminated. Mailed notice (yxp, ) |
| Filing 6 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Iain D. Johnston: Plaintiff J. Patrick Dohm brings this action apparently challenging the validity of a forty-year old indictment. He presents legal argument regarding the merits of his claim, but does not explain the basis for challenging an old indictment. Indeed, he appears to have already appealed directly and was adamant that this claim is not a habeas proceeding. Now, Dohm has filed a motion, which he titled a "motion to include previously filed motion in the nature of of [sic] writ of error coram nobis and US v. Weber, 71 F. Supp. 88 (N.D. Ill. 1947) Pursuant to 28 USC 1651(a)." Dkt. 5. Again, he presents legal argumentation of why he believes the original indictment was void. He has not paid the court's filing fee or applied to proceed in forma pauperis, however, which the Court already explained. His deadline to do one of those two things remains April 15, 2022. Until he chooses one of those routes and passes any subsequent screening under 28 U.S.C. 1915, his motion attacking the substance his claim is premature. The Court, therefore, denies the motion #5 without prejudice. The Court reminds Plaintiff, however, that all motions must seek specific relief from the Court. Fed. R. Civ. P. 7(b)(1)(C). Mailed notice (yxp, ) |
| MAILED copy of the Clerk's Notice entry along with the Joint Consent Form to plaintiff. (jp, ) |
| CLERK'S NOTICE: Pursuant to Local Rule 73.1(b), a United States Magistrate Judge of this court is available to conduct all proceedings in this civil action. If all parties consent to have the currently assigned United States Magistrate Judge conduct all proceedings in this case, including trial, the entry of final judgment, and all post-trial proceedings, all parties must sign their names on the attached #Consent To# form. This consent form is eligible for filing only if executed by all parties. The parties can also express their consent to jurisdiction by a magistrate judge in any joint filing, including the Joint Initial Status Report or proposed Case Management Order. (jp, ) |
| Filing 5 MOTION to Include previously filed Motion in the Nature of of Writ of Error by Plaintiff J. Patrick Dohm. (jxk) |
| Filing 4 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Iain D. Johnston: Plaintiff brings this declaratory judgment action seeking to dismiss a previous federal indictment. He has not, however, paid the filing fee or filed an application to proceed in forma pauperis. By April 15, 2022, he must pay the fee or submit an application to proceed in forma pauperis. Plaintiff is warned, however, that he appears to be challenging an indictment and subsequent conviction that was already appealed to the Seventh Circuit. But even pro se litigants are required to follow the rules outlined in Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 11(b). Furthermore, if Plaintiff applies for, and is granted, leave to proceed in forma pauperis, the Court will screen his complaint as it is obligated to do under 28 U.S.C. 1915(e)(2)(B), and will dismiss his complaint if it is frivolous, fails to state a claim, or otherwise seeks damages from a defendant who is immune. (yxp, ) |
| Filing 3 PRO SE Appearance by Plaintiff J. Patrick Dohm. (jp, ) |
| Filing 2 CIVIL Cover Sheet. (jp, ) |
| CASE ASSIGNED to the Honorable Iain D. Johnston and Honorable Lisa A. Jensen. Designated as Magistrate Judge the Honorable Lisa Jensen. FEE DUE, NO INFORMA PAUPERIS APPLICATION SUBMITTED. Case assignment: Random assignment. (jp, ) |
| Filing 1 RECEIVED PETITION For Declaratory Judgment and Motion to Dismiss Counts One, Two, Three, Four and Five of the Indictment For Failure to State an Offense filed by J. Patrick Dohm; (Attachments: #1 Proof of Service, #2 Enclosure 1, #3 Enclosure 2, #4 Enclosure 3) (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.
