BARRETT v. FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS et al
| KENNETH EUGENE BARRETT |
| FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS, T.J. WATSON and MICHAEL CARVAJAL |
| 2:2020cv00596 |
| November 10, 2020 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of Indiana |
| Doris L Pryor |
| James R Sweeney |
| Prisoner Petitions - Prison Condition |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1331 |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on January 4, 2021. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 14 RECEIPT #IP071978 for initial partial filing fee in the amount of $37.17, paid by Kimberly Skaggs for Plaintiff. (REO) |
| Filing 13 RETURN of Service, filed by All Plaintiffs. FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS served on 12/10/2020. (Attachments: #1 Receipt, #2 Receipt, #3 Receipt)(Skaggs, Kimberly) |
Filing 12
ORDER granting #11 Motion for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis the extent that the plaintiff is assessed an initial partial filing fee of thirty-seven dollars and seventeen cents ($37.17). The plaintiff shall have through December 31, 2020, in which to pay this sum to the clerk of the district court. SEE ORDER. Signed by Judge James R. Sweeney II on 12/2/2020. (JRB)
|
| Filing 11 MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis , filed by Plaintiff KENNETH EUGENE BARRETT. (Attachments: #1 Text of Proposed Order)(Skaggs, Kimberly) |
|
Filing 10
Order Directing Payment of Filing Fee, Screening Complaint, and Dismissing Deficient Claims - No later than December 1, 2020, Mr. Barrett shall pay the $400 filing fee for this action to the clerk of the district court or demonstrate his financial inability to do so. Because a suit against the Federal Bureau of Prisons and its Director in his official capacity is a suit against the same defendant, one of the named defendants is unnecessary to this action. The clerk is directed to terminate the Federal Bureau of Prisons as a defendant on the docket. Mr. Barrett's Eighth Amendment claim and Rehabilitation Act claim shall proceed as pled against defendants Carvajal and Watson in their official capacities. SEE ORDER. Signed by Judge James R. Sweeney II on 11/16/2020.(KAA)
|
| Filing 9 RECEIPT #IP071514 for pro hac vice fee in the amount of $100.00, paid by Kimberly Skaggs for #2 Motion to Appear Pro Hac Vice. (DJH) Modified on 11/16/2020 (DJH). |
| Filing 8 NOTICE of Appearance by Kimberly Marcinko Skaggs on behalf of Plaintiff KENNETH EUGENE BARRETT. (Skaggs, Kimberly) |
| Filing 7 Summons Issued as to MICHAEL CARVAJAL, FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS, T.J. WATSON. (RSF) |
|
Filing 6
ORDER granting #2 Motion to Appear pro hac vice. Signed by Magistrate Judge Doris L. Pryor on 11/12/2020. (RSF)
|
| Filing 5 Proposed Summons submitted for issuance by the clerk as to MICHAEL CARVAJAL, FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS, T.J. WATSON. (Skaggs, Kimberly) |
| Filing 4 PRACTICES AND PROCEDURES before Judge James R. Sweeney II. (RSF) |
| Filing 3 MAGISTRATE JUDGE's NOTICE of Availability to Exercise Jurisdiction issued. (RSF) |
| Filing 2 MOTION for Attorney(s) Kimberly M. Skaggs to Appear pro hac vice (Filing fee $100 forwarded for processing), filed by Plaintiff KENNETH EUGENE BARRETT. (Attachments: #1 Text of Proposed Order)(RSF) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT for Declaratory and Injunctive Relief against MICHAEL CARVAJAL, FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS, T.J. WATSON, filed by KENNETH EUGENE BARRETT. (No fee paid with this filing) (Attachments: #1 Grievances, #2 July 26 letter, #3 October 1 letter)(RSF) |
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 Indiana 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.
