Patel v. LeBlond
| Kinnari Pinakin Patel |
| Philippe LeBlond |
| 5:2020cv00238 |
| June 3, 2020 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of Kentucky |
| Karen K Caldwell |
| P SO |
| Other Fraud |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1332 |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on June 4, 2020. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 7 JUDGMENT: 1. Kinnari Pinakin Patels complaint #1 is DISMISSED without prejudice to her right to pursue this matter in the appropriate forum. 2. This specific action is STRICKEN from the Courts docket. 3. This is a FINAL and APPEALABLE Judgment, and there is no just cause for delay. Signed by Judge Karen K. Caldwell on 6/4/2020.(GLD)cc: CORand Patel by US Mail |
Filing 6
ORDER: 1. granting #3 Motion for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis and payment of filing fee is waived. 2. Patels complaint #1 is DISMISSED without prejudice to her right to pursue this matter in the appropriate forum. 3. This specific action is STRICKEN from the Courts docket. 4. The Court will enter an appropriate Judgment. Signed by Judge Karen K. Caldwell on 6/4/2020. (GLD)cc: COR and Patel by US Mail
|
| Filing 5 STANDING ORDER re: Disclosure of Contact Information: 1. pro se litigants must provide current telephone number, residential address, & if different, mailing address. 2. pro se litigants must provide written notice of change of residential address, & if different, mailing address. 3. Clerk file copy of Order in all non-prisoner pro se actions. Failure to provide required information or change of address may result in appropriate sanctions. (GLD)cc: COR and Patel by US Mail |
| Filing 4 IMPORTANT NOTICE to Pro Se Filer: Information relating to pro se filings and F.R.Civ.P. 5.2 requiring personal identifiers be partially redacted from documents filed with the court. #Click here for more information on the rules. It is the sole responsibility of counsel and the parties to comply with the rules requiring redaction of personal data identifiers.cc: pro se filer via U.S. Mail (Attachments: #1 sample caption)(GLD) |
| Filing 3 MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis by Kinnari Pinakin Patel, pro se. Motions referred to P SO. (GLD) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT (NO PROCESS REQUESTED)., filed by Kinnari Pinakin Patel, pro se. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit Documentation and copies of checks, #2 Envelope no postmark)(GLD) |
| Conflict Check run. (GLD) |
| ***MOTION SUBMITTED TO PSO for review: re #3 MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis by Kinnari Pinakin Patel, ***FILE SUBMITTED TO PSO for review: #1 Complaint (GLD) |
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 Kentucky Eastern 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
| Search for this case: Patel v. LeBlond | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Plaintiff: Kinnari Pinakin Patel | |
| 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: Philippe LeBlond | |
| 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.
