Ayala v. Gee et al
| Carlos Ayala |
| Jefferey Strubhart, John R. Baldwin, J. Garrett, Eldon L. Cooper, Shaun C. Gee, J. K. Petty, John/Jane Doe, C/O Sims, Jana K. Carie, Debbie Knaver and Nicholas R. Lamb |
| 3:2019cv00033 |
| January 9, 2019 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of Illinois |
| Nancy J Rosenstengel |
| Prison Condition |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on June 3, 2019. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 5
ORDER: The Court has received your payment of the filing fee. Now the Court will review your complaint to identify legally sufficient claims and defendants and dismiss any legally insufficient claims. See 28 U.S.C. Sec. 1915A. The Court will conduct this review within the next 60 days and inform you of the findings in a Merit Review Order. No other action will be taken in your case during this time, absent extraordinary circumstances. Therefore, you do not need to submit any evidence, argument, motions, or other documents. If you filed a motion for recruitment of counsel along with your complaint, it will not be considered until the merit review is complete. Please note that any motion for recruitment of counsel must include evidence of your own efforts to find counsel, such as a list of the attorneys you contacted and copies of letters you sent or received. See Pruitt v. Mote, 503 F.3d 647, 654-55 (7th Cir. 2007). If you do not receive a Merit Review Order within the next 60 days, you may file a motion requesting the status of your case. In the event your claim(s) survive the merit review, further information and instruction will be provided to you at that time. In addition, several administrative matters warrant mention. Any communication directed to the Court should be in the form of a motion or other pleading and not a letter. A copy of the Notice and Consent to Proceed Before a Magistrate Judge form is attached to this Order. Finally, you are advised that if your address changes, you must notify the Court within seven days of the change by filing a Notice of Change of Address. Failure to do so could result in the dismissal of your case. Signed by Judge Nancy J. Rosenstengel on 1/23/2019. (tjk)THIS TEXT ENTRY IS AN ORDER OF THE COURT. NO FURTHER DOCUMENTATION WILL BE MAILED.
|
| Filing fee: $ 400.00, receipt number 34625090157 (cds) |
|
Filing 4
ORDER re: Plaintiffs request for preliminary injunction. This pro se civil rights action was filed on January 9, 2019. (Doc. 1). The Court notes that the Complaint includes a request for a preliminary injunction. The Court finds, however, that the requested relief is not justified at this time. According to the Complaint, after a disciplinary hearing at Menard Correctional Center, Plaintiff was placed in segregation at Lawrence Correctional Center. Plaintiff asserts that his due process rights were violated during the hearing and that he was subjected to unconstitutional conditions of confinement in segregation at Lawrence. In his request for relief, Plaintiff seeks a preliminary injunction ordering the defendants to stop violating his constitutional rights. Plaintiff does not assert, much less establish, that he is in actual and imminent danger of being harmed if an injunction does not issue. He is no longer housed at Menard or Lawrence. Plaintiff is currently housed at Stateville Correctional Center. There is no indication that he will suffer irreparable harm absent the requested preliminary relief. Accordingly, Plaintiff fails to make a clear showing that he is entitled to a preliminary injunction. See Grace Sch. v. Burwell, 801 F.3d 788 (7th Cir. 2015) (To obtain a preliminary injunction, the moving party must establish, among other things, that he is likely to suffer irreparable harm in the absence of preliminary relief). For these reasons, the request for preliminary relief is DENIED. Signed by Judge Nancy J. Rosenstengel on 1/11/2019. (anp)THIS TEXT ENTRY IS AN ORDER OF THE COURT. NO FURTHER DOCUMENTATION WILL BE MAILED.
|
|
Filing 3
NOTICE AND ORDER: The Court has received your Complaint. Your case number is 19-33-NJR. Within 30 days of the entry of this Order, you are ORDERED to submit the $400.00 filing fee or a motion to proceed without prepayment of the filing fee. If you file a motion to proceed without prepayment of the filing fee, the Court must review your trust fund account statement for the six-month period immediately preceding the filing of this action. Thus, you must have the Trust Fund Officer at your facility complete the attached certification and provide a copy of your trust fund account statement (or institutional equivalent). If you fail to pay the filing fee or submit the motion to proceed without prepayment of the filing fee by the deadline, the case will be dismissed without prejudice for failure to prosecute. FED. R. CIV. P. 41(b); Sperow v. Melvin, 153 F.3d 780, 781 (7th Cir. 1998). All mail should be sent to: Clerk's Office, U.S. District Court, 750 Missouri Avenue, East St. Louis, IL 62201. Finally, you are advised that if your address changes, you must notify the Court within seven days of the change by filing a Notice of Change of Address. Failure to do so could result in the dismissal of your case. (Action due by 2/8/2019.) Signed by Judge Nancy J. Rosenstengel on 1/9/2019. (Attachments: #1 Consent to Magistrate Judge)(jaj)
|
| Filing 2 MOTION to Appoint Counsel by Carlos Ayala. (jaj) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT against All Defendants filed by Carlos Ayala.(jaj) |
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 Southern 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.
