Oliver v Sabens et al
Plaintiff: King Michael Oliver
Defendant: Andrew Sabens, Carbondale Police Department and Ashley Noto
Case Number: 3:2019cv00792
Filed: July 22, 2019
Court: US District Court for the Southern District of Illinois
Presiding Judge: J Phil Gilbert
Nature of Suit: Prisoner: Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983
Jury Demanded By: None
Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on October 30, 2019. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
September 19, 2019 Opinion or Order Filing 11 ORDER: This matter does not survive 28 U.S.C. 1915A review, and the Complaint is DISMISSED without prejudice for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. Defendant Carbondale Police Department is DISMISSED with prejudice and the Clerk of Court is DIRECTED to TERMINATE it as a party in the Court's Case Management/Electronic Case Filing ("CM/ECF") system. Plaintiff's motion for the issuance of subpoenas (Doc. #3 ) is DENIED. Plaintiff is GRANTED leave to file a First Amended Complaint on or before October 17, 2019. Should Plaintiff fail to file his First Amended Complaint within the allotted time or consistent with the instructions set forth in the Order, the entire case shall be dismissed with prejudice for failure to comply with a court order and/or for failure to prosecute his claims. The Clerk of Court is DIRECTED to mail Plaintiff a blank civil rights complaint form and to add "also known as Michael Oliver" to Plaintiff's name on the docket in CM/ECF. Signed by Judge J. Phil Gilbert on 9/19/2019. (ksp)
August 19, 2019 Filing 10 NOTICE of Change of Address by King Michael Oliver. (jsm2)
July 30, 2019 Opinion or Order Filing 9 ORDER GRANTING Plaintiff's motion to proceed in forma pauperis ("IFP") (Doc. #2 ). Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Section 1915(b)(1), Plaintiff is assessed an initial partial filing fee of $2.39. The agency having custody of Plaintiff is directed to forward the initial partial filing fee from Plaintiff's account to the Clerk of Court upon receipt of this Order. Plaintiff shall make monthly payments of 20% of the preceding month's income credited to Plaintiff's prison trust fund account (including all deposits to the inmate account from any source) until the $350.00 filing fee is paid in full. The agency having custody of Plaintiff shall forward payments from Plaintiff's account to the Clerk of this Court each time the amount in the account exceeds $10 until the $350.00 filing fee is paid.In addition, Plaintiff shall note that the filing fees for multiple cases cumulate. See Newlin v. Helman, 123 F.3d 429, 436 (7th Cir. 1997), overruled in part on other grounds by Lee v. Clinton, 209 F.3d 1025 (7th Cir. 2000); Walker v. O'Brien, 216 F.3d 626 (7th Cir. 2000). A prisoner who files one suit must remit 20% of his monthly income to the Clerk of the Court until his fees have been paid; a prisoner who files a second suit or an appeal must remit 40%; and so on. Newlin, 123 F.3d at 436. "Five suits or appeals mean that the prisoner's entire monthly income must be turned over to the court until the fees have been paid." Id. Payments shall be mailed to: Clerk of the Court, United States District Court for the Southern District of Illinois, 750 Missouri Avenue, East St. Louis, Illinois 62201. The Clerk is DIRECTED to mail a copy of this Order to the Trust Fund Officer at the Vandalia Correctional Center upon entry of this Order. Signed by Judge J. Phil Gilbert on 7/30/2019. (tjk)THIS TEXT ENTRY IS AN ORDER OF THE COURT. NO FURTHER DOCUMENTATION WILL BE MAILED.
July 29, 2019 Filing 8 CONSENT/NON-CONSENT TO U.S. MAGISTRATE JUDGE - sealed pending receipt from all parties. (jsm2)
July 25, 2019 Filing 7 Prisoner Trust Fund Account Statement. (jsm2)
July 24, 2019 Opinion or Order Filing 6 ORDER: Plaintiff has filed a Motion for Leave to Proceed in Forma Pauperis ("IFP") in this case (see Doc. #2 ), but has failed to provide the necessary prisoner trust fund account information as required by the PLRA to determine whether the inmate is entitled to proceed without prepaying fees and costs. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Section 1915(b)(1), the Court must review the prisoner trust fund account statement for the 6 month period immediately preceding the filing of this action. IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Plaintiff shall provide the Clerk of Court with the attached certification completed by the Trust Fund Officer at the facility and a copy of his/her trust fund account statement (or institutional equivalent) for the period 1/1/2019 to 7/22/2019 no later than 45 days from the date of this order. Failure to do so will result in dismissal of this action for failure to comply with an Order of this Court. Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b). See generally Ladien v. Astrachan, 128 F.3d 1051 (7th Cir. 1997); Johnson v. Kamminga, 34 F.3d 466 (7th Cir. 1994). The Clerk is DIRECTED to mail a copy of this Order and the certification form to the Trust Fund Officer at Vandalia Correctional Center. (Trust Fund Statement due on or before 9/9/2019). Signed by Judge J. Phil Gilbert on 7/24/2019. (tjk)
July 23, 2019 Opinion or Order Filing 5 ORDER DENYING Plaintiff's request in the #1 Complaint for an emergency restraining order compelling the Illinois Department of Corrections to release him from confinement based on his actual innocence. The United States Supreme Court has long held that the sole federal remedy for a state prisoner who is challenging the fact or duration of his physical confinement and seeking immediate or speedier release from imprisonment is a writ of habeas corpus. Preiser v. Rodriguez, 411 U.S. 475, 500 (1973). Plaintiff brings this action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 1983, and release from confinement is not an available remedy. Plaintiff's request for an emergency restraining order under Fed.R.Civ.P. 65(b) is thus DENIED. Signed by Judge J. Phil Gilbert on 7/23/2019. (ksp)THIS TEXT ENTRY IS AN ORDER OF THE COURT. NO FURTHER DOCUMENTATION WILL BE MAILED.
July 22, 2019 Opinion or Order Filing 4 NOTICE AND ORDER: The Court has received your complaint and your motion to proceed without prepayment of the filing fee. Your case number is 19-792-JPG. The following is some information you should know regarding the initial stages of your lawsuit. After your filing fee status is determined, 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. All mail should be sent to: Clerk's Office, U.S. District Court, 750 Missouri Avenue, East St. Louis, IL 62201. 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 J. Phil Gilbert on 7/22/2019. (jaj)
July 22, 2019 Filing 3 MOTION for Subpoena by King Michael Oliver. (jaj)
July 22, 2019 Filing 2 MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis by King Michael Oliver. (jaj)
July 22, 2019 Filing 1 COMPLAINT against All Defendants filed by King Michael Oliver.(jaj)
July 22, 2019 Judge J. Phil Gilbert added. (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 this case: Oliver v Sabens et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Andrew Sabens
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Carbondale Police Department
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Ashley Noto
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: King Michael Oliver
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]

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.


Why Is My Information Online?