Byrd v. Thompson et al
Plaintiff: Thomas Byrd
Defendant: D. Ross and Warden Thompson
Case Number: 3:2020cv00809
Filed: August 21, 2020
Court: US District Court for the Southern District of Illinois
Presiding Judge: Stephen P McGlynn
Referring Judge: Nancy J Rosenstengel
Nature of Suit: Prison Condition
Cause of Action: 42:1983
Jury Demanded By: None
Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on October 9, 2020. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
October 9, 2020 Filing 12 CLERK'S JUDGMENT. Approved by Judge Stephen P. McGlynn on 10/9/2020. (tjk)
October 9, 2020 Opinion or Order Filing 11 ORDER DISMISSING CASE without prejudice for failure to comply with an order of this Court. Signed by Judge Stephen P. McGlynn on 10/9/2020. (jrj)
October 6, 2020 Filing 10 Pursuant to Administrative Order No. 277, this case is transferred from Chief Judge Nancy J. Rosenstengel and reassigned to Judge Stephen P. McGlynn. Unless the newly assigned judge directs otherwise, all deadlines and hearing dates shall remain in effect. All future pleadings shall bear the case number 20-809-SPM. (lmb)
September 14, 2020 Filing 9 NOTICE: Plaintiff was directed to file the attached form regarding consenting or declining to consent to magistrate judge jurisdiction. The time for doing so has now passed, and the Court has not received the form. As required by Administrative Order No. 257, Plaintiff shall return the form within 7 days or face possible sanctions. The Clerk notes that due to the COVID-19 public health crisis, deadlines that were pending on or before April 1, 2020 were extended in accord with Administrative Order No. 261 and/or Amended Administrative Order No. 261. This automated notice does not take into account any such extensions. If, after the expiration of the 7-day deadline set forth herein, the Court chooses to take further action, all applicable deadline extensions will be considered at that time. Consent due by 9/21/2020 (jaj)
September 8, 2020 Filing 8 NOTICE OF MODIFICATION re #7 Order on Motion for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis,,,, Order on Motion for TRO,,,.Deadline is October 2, 2020 for the filing fee and signed complaint to be filed. Text read 10/1/2020 in error. Entry updated and no further action is required. (jaj)THIS TEXT ENTRY IS AN ORDER OF THE COURT. NO FURTHER DOCUMENTATION WILL BE MAILED.
September 8, 2020 Filing fee and signed Complaint due by 10/2/2020. (jaj)
September 4, 2020 Opinion or Order Filing 7 ORDER denying #5 Motion for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis; denying #6 Motion for TRO/Preliminary Injunction. Byrd SHALL pay the full filing fee of $400.00 for this action AND submit a properly signed complaint on or before October 2, 2020. If he fails to comply with this Order in the time allotted by the Court, this case will be dismissed for failure to comply with a court order and for failure to prosecute this action. See FED. R. CIV. P. 41(b); Ladien v. Astrachan, 128 F.3d 1051, 1056-57 (7th Cir. 1997); Johnson v. Kamminga, 34 F.3d 466, 468 (7th Cir. 1994). Byrd is again WARNED that if he files a lawsuit in the future without fully disclosing his litigation history, including his four "strike," the new action shall be subject to immediate dismissal. Signed by Chief Judge Nancy J. Rosenstengel on 9/4/2020. (jrj) Modified on 9/8/2020 (jaj).
September 2, 2020 Filing 6 MOTION for Temporary Restraining Order /Preliminary Injunction by Thomas Byrd. (jaj)
September 2, 2020 Filing 5 MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis by Thomas Byrd. (jaj)
August 25, 2020 Amended Pleadings due by 9/23/2020. (jaj)
August 24, 2020 Opinion or Order Filing 4 ORDER: On August 21, 2020, Plaintiff filed a Motion for Preliminary Injunction and Temporary Restraining Order. (Doc. #1 ). For the following reasons the motion is DENIED without prejudice. First, this action has not been properly initiated. The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure provide that "[a] civil action is commenced by filing a complaint with the court." Fed. R. Civ. P. 3. No complaint has been filed in this case, and the instant filing cannot be considered an adequate complaint. Furthermore, the Court cannot consider a motion for preliminary injunction without an affidavit or verified complaint. Fed. R. Civ. P. 65(b)(1)(A). Finally, the motion is not signed. Under Rule 11(a) "[e]very pleading, written motion, and other paper must be signed...by a party personally if the party is unrepresented." Although pro se litigants are not held to the same standards as licensed attorneys, they are not entitled to general dispensation from the rules of procedure. See Kyle v. Patterson, 196 F.3d 695, 697 (7th Cir. 1999); Jones v. Phipps, 39 F.3d 158, 163 (7th Cir. 1994). To proceed with this action, Plaintiff is ORDERED to submit a properly signed Complaint, including exhibits, by September 23, 2020. Failure to comply with this Order shall result in the dismissal of this action. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b). If Plaintiff still seeks a preliminary injunction after filing a complaint, he must file a new motion. The Clerk of Court is DIRECTED to send a blank civil rights complaint form to Plaintiff to assist him in filing a complaint. Signed by Chief Judge Nancy J. Rosenstengel on 8/24/2020. (jrj)THIS TEXT ENTRY IS AN ORDER OF THE COURT. NO FURTHER DOCUMENTATION WILL BE MAILED.
August 21, 2020 Filing 3 Letter from USDC/SDIL to Plaintiff informing him of case number and filing fee requirements. (Attachments: #1 Motion to Proceed IFP) (jaj)
August 21, 2020 Filing 2 NOTICE FROM CLERK Instructing Plaintiff to file Notice and Consent to Proceed Before A Magistrate Judge Jurisdiction Form: Pursuant to Administrative Order No. 257, within 21 days of this Notice, you must file the attached form indicating your consent to proceed before a Magistrate Judge or an affirmative declination to consent. Consent/Non-Consent to U.S. Magistrate Judge Jurisdiction form sent to Plaintiff on 8/21/2020. Consent due by 9/11/2020 (jaj)
August 21, 2020 Filing 1 MOTION for Preliminary Injunction and Temporary Restraining Order by Thomas Byrd. (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: Byrd v. Thompson 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: D. Ross
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: Warden Thompson
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: Thomas Byrd
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?